The effects of the war on Iran mark a fresh start in global geopolitics.
- Alastair Crooke 5 June 2026.uncutnews-ch/die-auswirkungen-des-iran-kriegs-markieren-einen-neuanfang-in-der-weltgeopolitik
Alastair Crooke
Beijing can finance itself cheaply and almost without restrictions, which allows it to last the most crucial American strategy to halt China.
It seems that all day brings a new, breathtaking claim that the American-Iranian "agreement" is just waiting to be signed. As frequently happens, mediators (Pakistani and Qatari) They hope to manipulate both parties, saying that the another is close to agreement, even though this is not the case – especially in an atmosphere of utmost distrust. In this way, the mediators are counting on them to accomplish a final agreement. This is simply a well-known tactic, which, however, frequently leads to greater confusion and deficiency of trust – alternatively of the expected solution.
At this stage, the "plan" consists of only 2 main pillars: the "reopening" of the Strait of Ormuz by Iran (under the conditions of Iran) in exchange for the abolition of the U.S. naval blockade and, at a later date, an agreement to address the dilution problem of Iranian uranium enriched to 60% in exchange for the termination of sanctions.
To say the devil is in the details would be understatement of the year. Iran understands that Trump's headlines about a "close deal" are aimed, first, at maintaining the high-rate U.S. stock exchange and maintaining oil futures well below the physical transportation price. Secondly, they search to conceal the fact that Trump can search a credible way to end the war through a quick, incomplete agreement that would most likely be mostly in line with Iran's conditions.
All another issues, including key details of a possible atomic agreement, would be put off.
Trump wants a preliminary concession from Iran, which he will be able to present as tangible success – and which will besides satisfy the markets. But Iran will not replace its military advantage, the strategical dominance he achieved in the war, or the Strait of Ormuz with the vague assurances of mediators. Iran doesn't trust the United States at all.
Ali Akbar Velayati, elder advisor to the Iranian ultimate Leader, notes:
History shows that all who pursued hegemony – from Alexander the Great, through Genghis-chan, to Trump – yet died in the heart of ancient Iranian civilization. This time Iran's red line is clear: the papers and signatures themselves do not give any guarantee. A tangible warrant of the endurance of any agreement is the Strait of Ormuz.
"Because geography does not lie and is the final justice of all contract written on paper".
The mediators naturally desperately want to avoid another circular of war. However, Iran demands circumstantial details. It's Trump's dilemma. He wants a swift victory, but the proposition of a watered-down, incomplete agreement – mainly on Iran's terms – drew on him the anger of the pro-Israeli billionaire class (the opposition was strong), and Israel (probably encouraged by the same circles) then undermined Trump's ceasefire, starting a military attack on Lebanon and Gaza, thereby breaking the ceasefire as a prerequisite for any agreement.
Trump is under force to take action (any movement possibly impairs its situation, strategical or internal).
We saw the same zigzagic, improvised non-strategic, perfectly illustrated on the iconic photos of Trump's visit to Beijing – Trump improvised; no preparation; highest “from the lining.”
This image can specify this era – the iconic minute was the president of the United States making an impression of a loser, while president Xi was most likely showing who had control.
One might ask, why would the pro-Israeli class hazard the demolition of the West with economical consequences of the long-term closure of the Strait of Ormuz, which could be the consequence of their furious veto against Trump's proposed "agreement"? possibly due to the fact that since the 2008 crisis and the resulting structural transfer of wealth from the real economy to the financialised “trader elite”, “great judaic money” seem to be resistant to economical crises. They may even view them as an ‘opportunity’ (when assets become cheap).
Iran's impact means, if not a direct cause, surely as a triggering factor, a turning point in a crucial reorganisation of global geopolitics. This is bad news for Israel. The current Israeli communicative states that the deficiency of agreement is better than a bad agreement due to the fact that Israel can return to war with Iran at any time next year or two.
Of course, no 1 believes that. Israel cannot wage war with Iran without full US support. And America next day will most likely have a different relation with Israel than today.
Nahum Barnea wrote in Yediot Aharonot:
‘We [Israel] plunge into an endless war on 3 or possibly 4 fronts, keeping territories that do not belong to us, with soldiers that we do not have, in a bloody war against enemies that we are not able to deter – and all this without ensuring our citizens' actual security. Israel must escape the Iranian trap. [But] Netanjahu is the last individual to have the chance to free us from it.”
Russia is besides changing (partly influenced by Iran). Her strategical patience ran out, and a fresh fatal attack by a Ukrainian drone on a dormitory in the Russian town of Starobielsk, in which at least 21 people, mostly girls and young women, were killed, was named a "drop of bitterness" in Moscow. The Russian public is rightly outraged.
Moscow blames the European capitals and Kiev for fresh Ukrainian drone and rocket attacks deep in Russia, conducted utilizing NATO airspace to bypass Russian air defense. Moreover, Russia officially informed Washington (in a telephone conversation with Marco Rubio in India) that it besides placed the European capitals and Kiev liable for the collapse of Anchorage Framework.
Russia has stated that it intends to deprive Ukraine of the ability to carry out further attacks and to destruct the decision-making centres that plan and direct attacks on Russians – even if this means the death of American and European personnel. On April 15, the Russian Ministry of Defence published letters containing the names and addresses of more than 20 European companies and joint venture companies that allegedly supplied Ukraine with drones and components. High-ranking Russian officials, including Vice-President of the safety Council of Dmitry Medvedev, clearly identified these entities as ‘potential targets’ of the Russian armed forces.
Europe has been warned.
Once again, it seems that the Trump-Xi and Putin-Xi peaks in Beijing are announcing the transition to a more hard geopolitical era.
These 2 summits seem to have prompted China to abandon its erstwhile restraint to counter US attempts to extend the usage of the dollar at the expense of the yuan. The US Treasury Department's main strategy is to reduce China's competitive advantage by expanding capital and energy costs. Initially, the United States tried this with customs but unsuccessfully, and then attempted to rise the cost of energy supply to China by blocking (against Iran and Venezuela).
But if Trump wants a comprehensive trade conflict, China seems ready now - no more "nice master".
China does not respond with sanctions or rockets, but, more precisely, puts force on the US economy, limiting the movement of capital to the dollar zone.
The US Genius Act and the Clarity Act aim to draw investors distant from local currencies to cryptocurrency based on US dollars and secured by US fiscal bonds. This would increase request for dollars and make fresh request for US bonds.
In short, the United States wants to attract as much abroad capital as possible to its markets through cryptocurrency – as a substitute for a weakening petrodolar.
China responds by limiting the flow of Chinese capital to US markets. Authorities are after brokers in Hong Kong. Chinese savings – the largest in the planet – will no longer be available.
Secondly, China will open a fresh gold trade center in Hong Kong. This will strengthen the yuan and enable oil trade in exchange for gold.
Thirdly, Euroclear plans to accept Chinese bonds as collateral.
Sean Foo explains:
"If Euroclear accepts Chinese bonds, they will be treated as cash and will become part of global financial infrastructure".
"China has over $50 trillion of bank deposits – more than the EU, US and Japan combined. This creates a unchangeable home request for bonds."
In conclusion, with the increase in capital in Chinese bonds, the financing costs of China stay low. Beijing can so finance itself cheaply and almost without restrictions – and thus last the American strategy of stopping China.
