One of the most curious aspects to the predictable USMCA review, ie. dissolution, has been the incapacity of the Canadian government or trade delegation to accept the United States is going to create two distinctly different bilateral trade agreements and eliminate the trilateral USMCA.

For 16 months the Canadians have refused to fathom the reality of what is going to happen this year.

The Canadians just cannot believe it is possible they will be forced to negotiate a free trade agreement without the cover of a multilateral construct. It has been remarkable to watch their dissonance.

Last week President Donald Trump and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum held a phone call. At the conclusion of the call, Sheinbaum publicly asserted the reality the Canadians just refuse to accept.

MEXICO – Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum told reporters during her morning news briefing on Wednesday that her U.S. counterpart, Donald Trump, is open to doing away with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement (USMCA) and replace it with individual trade deals with each country.

[…] “There might be revisions that create bilateral deals instead of involving the three countries because some things are more important between Mexico and the United Sates or between Canada and the United States,” said Sheinbaum. “Not everything has to be trilateral.”

Mexico’s president said the subject was brought up by Trump during a Tuesday phone conversation. […] According to Sheinbaum, her country is ready to consider possible changes. (read more)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finally started to realize President Trump was likely to ignore Canada and begin direct discussions with Sheinbaum. So, Carney went to Mexico to try and get assurances from Sheinbaum that Mexico would not proceed without Canadian interests in mind.

(more…)

Almost all of the corporate news programs today are carbon copies of the same tired talking points, driving home the reality that mainstream U.S. media are concentric circles of the same news feed.  Essentially, media reports reporting on media reports, of other organized media reports.

No one seems to be asking any of the core operational and policy questions that can cut to the heart of the matter.  ie., “you are doing XXX, what is the intent of this action/policy move, and can you describe in actionable terms what benefit the American people can expect as a result of the anticipated outcome”?   Instead, the questions are all hindsight and reactionary.  Frankly, the repetition is mind-numbing.

In this Fox interview, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright answers some of the same questions from the CBS interview, sans the arrogant and condescending tone during the questioning.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

When President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin met in Alaska on August 15, 2025, the focus of the geopolitical world was on discussions surrounding Ukraine.  Unfortunately, it didn’t take long, merely a few hours, for both the U.S. and Russia to say that no progress was made.  However, also noted at the time was both the USA and Russia saying sideline discussions took place surrounding the possibility for a strategic relationship surrounding energy development.

What follows below is a review of the current energy dynamic, specifically surrounding LNG, against the backdrop of the Iran war with a hindsight review of that previous discussion between Putin and Trump.

What most people are missing in their current analysis was something that took place immediately following that Alaska summit six months ago.  Something that did not make any sense until now. {GO DEEP PART I HERE}

Three days after that summit meeting, on August 18, 2025, Russia announced they were restarting Russia’s Arctic-2 LNG production facility.  Russia would be more than doubling their capacity to generate and store liquified natural gas (LNG).

It absolutely did not make sense that Russia would start producing even more LNG considering the previously imposed western sanctions against them, and the fact that Russia was already overproducing LNG. As noted by analysts at the time:

AUGUST 18, 2025 – Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 export facility, which is sanctioned by the United States, is coming back to life after a year of no activity and is looking for buyers in Asia.

[…] The U.S. and EU sanctions on Russia’s Arctic LNG 2, which was billed as Russia’s flagship LNG project, have effectively frozen the start-up of the export facility in the Gydan Peninsula.

[…] Last year, Russia started shipping LNG from its flagship Arctic LNG 2 project—but not to customers. The shipments were made from the Arctic project to floating storage units either in Russia or in European waters, as potential customers were unwilling to buy the sanctioned LNG. {SOURCE}

In August of 2025, Russia was essentially producing more LNG than they could sell into the available market.  Russia was storing the overproduction from Arctic-1 on floating storage units and slowly selling to countries that did not align with the sanctions, specifically China and some Asian buyers.  Then suddenly, after the Trump summit, Russia decides to bring Arctic-2 online and produce even more LNG.  You can see how this did not make sense.

If they could not even sell all the Arctic-1 LNG output, then why would Russia bring Arctic-2 LNG production online?

That was six months ago.

(more…)

We like the deep weeds, most do not.  The geopolitical ramifications of the U.S. confrontation with Iran are vast and complicated; however, to encapsulate one of the most interesting dynamics consider this ‘tldr’ statement to open the discussion with your friends: Right now, Russia is like Amazon during COVID-19.

What follows is not me saying President Trump and President Putin are holding nightly conversations, discussing steps or details, or even obliquely coordinating measures as Trump eliminates the generational threat posed by Iran.

However, I am saying that given the nature of all contact and communication between Trump and Putin, including extensive contacts by their representative emissaries, both Putin and Trump are well aware of each downstream effect from the Iranian confrontation.

Two days after the U.S./Israel began Operation Epic Fury, President Vladimir Putin said Russia should consider shutting down oil and liquified natural gas (LNG) shipments to the EU in advance of the previously scheduled April deadline date when the EU would stop purchases.

♦ First, remember ‘force majeure’ contract nullification is in place for every producer, supplier and transporter in the middle east. Second, with shipments from the Gulf of Oman greatly reduced, LNG prices along with oil prices are increasing rapidly.  The result – ships filled with oil and LNG currently on the water are diverting in real time as international bidding for the content of the ships take place.

If Putin stops selling LNG to Europe, and Europe cannot get LNG from the Gulf of Oman, and China/Asia are LNG dependent (not exporting), then where is Europe going to get the LNG to replace what Russia will no longer provide?

Answer: The United States, and to a lesser extent, Norway.

[SIDENOTE: now does President Trump continuously smacking Great Britain about shutting down their North Sea oil and gas operations take on context?  Geopolitical foresight? I digress. END SIDENOTE]

The European Commission’s decision to phase out and ultimately stop purchasing Russian oil/gas was made in 2025 prior to the Iran conflict triggering.  Europe’s replacement plan included increased LNG purchases from the U.S., Norway and middle east; the latter supply option is now void.

Europe’s decision to stop buying oil/gas from Russia puts them in a very precarious position.  The supply option for Europe is suddenly very limited, and Putin’s statement about stopping the flow early was obviously made with this understanding in mind.

(more…)

The geopolitical ramifications of the oil and liquified natural gas (LNG) impact from the ongoing conflict with Iran is changing many of the world’s energy supply chains. Given the nature of the issues there are a myriad of complex dynamics to discuss. However, one key component is the U.S. policy shift to deal with the supply.

With that in mind, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears with Larry Kudlow to discuss the United States’ new $20 billion maritime reinsurance plan as well as the ongoing conflict in Iran. CTH will be expanding the conversation specifically as it relates to Russian oil/gas sales. This is a good precursor interview. WATCH:

.

(more…)

Do you remember this moment during the 2015 republican presidential debates when all of the candidates were on stage and leading control outlet Fox News (Bret Baier) purposefully asked the candidates:

…”is there anyone on stage, unwilling tonight, to pledge your support to the eventual nominee of the republican party, and pledge to not run an independent campaign against that person.  Again, we are looking for you to raise your hand now if you won’t make that pledge tonight.”

[The moment in video is here] The need for control is a reaction to fear.  The question was intentionally constructed to create both an optic and a narrative Fox News, Rupert Murdoch and the republican party were purposefully shaping.  Collectively the professional republicans were desperately afraid Donald Trump would run as an independent candidate.

I bring us back to that moment because it is the key to understand where we are even today.  This was the core of the matter. This is the “trillions at stake” aspect.  This is the economics of the thing as it first manifest.

Why did Donald J Trump stand against them all?

For many years before that moment, a small group of us had been outlining why it was urgent for MAGAnomics to take charge of the U.S. economy; because underneath both wings of the UniParty in Washington DC was a system that few understood.

♦ Prior to 2016, the United States Chamber of Commerce (U.S CoC), a private K-Street lobbying consortium, were the negotiators for every single trade deal done from the office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR).

The U.S. government (USTR, POTUS and Congress) was the trade stakeholder who signed the agreements; however, the actual nuts and bolts of what the trade deal included, the terms and conditions, were negotiated by the US CoC.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce represented the corporate interests of their Wall Street clients. After all, the corporations paid the CoC and the business model of the CoC is dependent on the corporations.

This is the larger background for how decades of trade agreements ended up with offshoring, the Rust Belt, diminished domestic manufacturing, and increased corporate profits. This is the core mechanics of how a U.S. manufacturing economy was shifted to a “service driven economy.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce was writing the trade deals. The CoC would then fund the politicians who would approve the trade deals. The CoC would also finance the presidential candidates.

When President Trump ran for office in 2016, his trade, manufacturing and economic policies were against the interests of the entire business network that controlled trade. The U.S. CoC poured money into Hillary Clinton’s campaign and their main GOP partner in the enterprise, Mitch McConnell.

When Trump won the election, he completely shut out the CoC from any involvement in U.S. trade negotiations. Trump literally put himself, Wilbur Ross, and Robert Lighthizer in control.

(more…)

The U.S. and Israel have been targeting deep underground missile sites within Iran, with strong success.  Iranian counterstrikes, missile & drone launches are down 80 to 90 percent according to Pentagon officials.

Additionally, the Israeli military has reported they dismantled an underground bunker system in Tehran used by regime leadership.  Originally the bunker was used by slain Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei underneath the leadership compound in central Tehran.  The bunker was targeted by 50 Israeli fighter jets and subsequently destroyed.

President Trump announced via Truth Social that he will not seek any terms with Iran other than unconditional surrender.

[SOURCE]

Meanwhile, in a somewhat predictable move, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has announced the U.S. will lift some sanctions on Russian oil exports in order to mitigate shortfalls.  India will be permitted to purchase additional Russian oil for use in their refineries.  The gasoline end products will then be sold into the market.

BESSENT: “President Trump’s energy agenda has resulted in oil and gas production reaching the highest levels ever recorded.

To enable oil to keep flowing into the global market, the Treasury Department is issuing a temporary 30-day waiver to allow Indian refiners to purchase Russian oil. This deliberately short-term measure will not provide significant financial benefit to the Russian government as it only authorizes transactions involving oil already stranded at sea.

(more…)

An interesting reaction from Beijing highlights an evaluation of risk from the lack of oil flowing from Iran.

According to most evaluated data, China was buying more than 80% of Iran’s shipped oil. That’s according to data from 2025 as analyzed by Kpler and published in January by Reuters.

Iranian oil always had limited buyers due to U.S. sanctions. However, China purchased on average 1.38 million barrels per day of Iranian oil last year, according to Kpler. That represented about 13.4% of the total 10.27 million bpd of oil it imported by sea.

With President Trump previously cutting of discounted oil from Venezuela, two things unfolded.  First, the Venezuela oil was no longer sold with non-petrodollar currencies; Venezuela oil is now being sold on the standard oil market.  Secondly, with the Venezuela oil disrupted China would become even more dependent on Iranian oil shipments if they wanted to retain the discounted rate.

How big is the financial difference?  According to Reuters, “Iranian Light crude has traded at around $8 to $10 a barrel below ICE Brent on a delivered basis to China since December.” … “That means Chinese refiners save about $8 to $10 a barrel if they buy Iranian Light rather than non-sanctioned oil.”

Additionally, as noted before Operation Epic Fury began, “Iran has a record amount of oil on the water, equivalent to around 50 days of output, as China has bought less because of sanctions and Tehran seeks to protect its supplies from the risk of U.S. strikes, Kpler said.”

Buying discounted oil from Venezuela, Iran and Russia resulted in billions of dollars saved by China.  The only production venue not currently disrupted would be purchases from Moscow.  This increases the dependency, but the purchase price may no longer carry any discounted value, at least not at the previous rate.

(more…)

I’m working on a deep explainer for the behavior of China as it relates to ongoing U.S. strategic military operations.  More to come soon.  In the interim, Carl Higbie from Newsmax outlines how China is spending domestically inside the USA in order to try and stimulate opposition to the Iran confrontation.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

This is a remarkable position for President Trump to take.  Optimal Solutions:

(President Trump) – “Effective IMMEDIATELY, I have ordered the United States Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide, at a very reasonable price, political risk insurance and guarantees for the Financial Security of ALL Maritime Trade, especially Energy, traveling through the Gulf. This will be available to all Shipping Lines.

If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible. No matter what, the United States will ensure the FREE FLOW of ENERGY to the WORLD. The United States’ ECONOMIC and MILITARY MIGHT is the GREATEST ON EARTH — More actions to come. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP“

President Trump will use the full weight of the U.S. military to change behavior in Iran.  Not just to change the regime per se’, but to change the behavior of whoever surfaces to represent the interests of the people.  The change in behavior is the goal.

While this forced shift is underway, the full weight of the USA will also seek to mitigate any collateral economic damage to well behaved economic partners.  Forceful action, optimal stewardship.

(more…)