-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

The US-Iran war has restarted, rattling the global economy. But strangely, the global spotlight is on China. The endless tug-of-war, whether to draw China closer or to block it, has reached a critical juncture.

In the United Kingdom, British Steel has been nationalized, effectively kicking out Chinese control as London seizes strategic assets, like commodity makers. In Europe, France and Germany are designing a “roadmap” to take on China, a massive shift for Berlin after decades of opening the door to Beijing. In Asia, Kazakhstan has signed $13 billion in deals with China, reasserting China’s footprint in Central Asia, fast replacing Russia as the central artery connecting Asia and Europe. Globally, Moonshot, one of China’s leading AI companies - part of China’s 6 “AI Tigers” - has unveiled Kimi K3, a new AI model with 2.8 trillion parameters, making it the world’s largest open-weight system. Meanwhile, China has said that the US may return Hong Kong’s special trade status, a sign of the US-China pendulum swinging yet again from hot to warm. And surrounding all of that, US President Donald Trump has accused China of meddling in the 2020 election and stealing a whopping 220 million voter files.

All of this has taken place in just over a week, throwing geopolitics in flux (yet again).

The UK is effectively on a collision course with China after the nationalization as the Chinese government warns of retaliation. Might China nationalize the operations of a British firm, tit-for-tat? The same goes for Europe, which has been trying to avoid an all-out trade war with China amidst a record heat wave. Yet, if the Paris-Berlin roadmap is cemented, the EU faces nothing short of an economic war with Beijing in the medium-term. The strange nuance: Europe is seeking to establish what French President Emmanuel Macron calls a “third pole” from the US and China. Yet, by fighting with China, the EU is aligning itself more with Washington, limiting its sovereign options. In tandem to all that, Trump’s accusation of Chinese election meddling - the same election that the US President claims he won - paints a dark stain over US-China relations. At least it should, in theory. The US has outright accused China of jeopardizing its democratic processes. However, in what is becoming common in geopolitics, where governments throw punches and embrace warmly simultaneously, Trump may very well cast aside action as he prepares to host Chinese President Xi Jinping in September, the second time both leaders would meet this year.

However, while all of the above is substantial, none of it compares to the “other” shift that took place. At the annual World AI Conference (WAIC), held in China, 29 nations have joined hands to launch the World AI Cooperation Organization (WAICO), including Kazakhstan, Russia, and Indonesia. WAICO is led by China, and represents the single biggest push by Beijing to set the global AI rules. It is no coincidence that WAICO sounds eerily similar to WTO (World Trade Organization). In the 20th century, the US sought to shape the rules for trade with WTO. In the 21st century, China is seeking to shape the rules for AI with WAICO. And “rules” is rather vague, because AI is multi-layered. There is development, deployment, trade, R&D, funding, training, skills, human capital, infrastructure, and data - all of which together make “AI” possible.

With WAICO, China is moving on all those fronts at the same time.

This is the true start of a Chinese-led AI order, what I warned about in my 2018 book “Geopolitics of AI.” This is a global fracturing between the Western order and what China is building. Some of the world’s largest economies are integrating into AI structures built and run by China, not the US or even the world. This should keep the lights of the White House on for weeks. It is even more significant than the IEA’s recent warning that China’s curbs on rare earths threaten $6.5 trillion in global production. WAICO is one of the first actual attempts by China to usurp America as the leading shot-caller. Either the US stamps out WAICO or builds an equivalent. Regardless, the geopolitics has shifted so profoundly that now, it is America who is trying to “catch up” to what China is doing, not the other way around.

It is no coincidence that all of this is occurring as the Iran war rages and the Middle East shakes. Governments across the world are seeking to shore up their “geopolitical security.” To do that, China is either in or out. And besides the West, who has always been skeptical of Beijing, for most of the world, China is not only in - it is becoming the new North Star.

(*Geopolitical Security is a concept/expression of Abishur Prakash)

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

A huge revelation occurred a few days ago: Chinese AI models now account for 46% of US enterprise token usage.

In plain speak, that means that almost 50% of AI queries from American firms are being inputted into Chinese AI systems, not American AI. Put differently: Chinese AI is outcompeting American AI in America.

Forget for a moment the obvious data and spying fears as US companies use Chinese AI in their internal operations. There is also a massive contradiction here. While Washington builds “tech walls” against China, and bangs the drum of America First, some US companies are putting Chinese AI first. Affordability is once again China’s edge, mimicking the Chinese success from manufacturing to EVs.

The revelation is so significant that US lawmakers are debating how to stop Chinese AI from spreading so rapidly through the economy (cue a new TikTok-approach as the US forces Chinese AI firms to hand over control of their local operations). It is also unlikely to be a coincidence that as American firms pick Chinese AI for cost, Meta’s new paid AI model has “ultra-low pricing.”

For decades, the lens to look at a development, like the spread of Chinese AI in the West, was national security. More recently, it has been economic security. Both occupy a different space. But both sit in the same backdrop and have a common thread: a new, disruptive geopolitical climate. The single biggest catalyst today for nations to achieve national security or economic security is geopolitics. Therefore, whether or not governments realize it, they are pursuing “geopolitical security.”

This is security from the shocks and risks that geopolitics is creating today across the economic, political, technological, and financial domains. Geopolitical security is now the umbrella that national security, economic security, and sovereignty sit under.

Chinese AI diffusing through the US is one example of geopolitical security. Another example is Canada’s deal with Germany for 12 submarines, the largest such deal in Canadian history. Part of this is about Canadian control over the Arctic. However, another part is Canada’s pursuit of more strategic autonomy from America (geopolitical security). The Canadian government explicitly ruled out nuclear-powered submarines in its procurement deal, focusing instead on diesel-powered. Here is where it gets interesting. The US does not produce or operate diesel-powered submarines. This meant no US firms even bid on the Canadian contract. A savvy play by Ottawa to reduce dependence on America without making it explicit? Likely. And, by selecting Germany, Canada is integrating deeper with Europe, creating a new common front to “manage” a more unpredictable world. This is geopolitical security, not just national security or economic security.

Geopolitical security is not an intellectual discussion. It is the new North Star of national thinking, even if few governments term it this way (for now). And, geopolitical security could result in profound changes.

As Washington wakes up to Chinese AI dominating the homeland, the White House will have to go beyond bans or forced handovers, fundamentally reshaping how America’s AI sector functions. The first step will be to significantly lower costs. Might the US introduce price ceilings for its AI companies? The moment costs drop, and demand surges, even more compute power (infrastructure) will be needed. More compute power will result in greater CAPEX, mainly by Washington, drawing the US government deeper into the AI race, and triggering similar moves from Beijing to Paris to Dubai. At the core of it all would be America’s pursuit of geopolitical security.

Whether boardrooms or government capitals, the single biggest headache today is what is happening across the globe. Therefore, the single biggest push today is to shield against it. Everybody is navigating the new jungle of world affairs. Everybody is seeking protection, insulation, or outright domination. In this never-ending tug-of-war between who rules and who follows, geopolitical security is the ultimate state everybody is rushing towards.

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

While US President Trump rips up the skeleton deal to end the Iran conflict, throwing the Middle East back into a state of war, a few thousand miles away, a fuel crisis is developing in Russia. The Kremlin has banned diesel exports and is seeking oil from Kazakhstan as videos circulate of Russians fighting over fuel at gas stations.

For at least two weeks, markets have observed a rapid fall in energy prices, with oil dropping to $70/barrel after peaking at around $120/barrel, signaling to some that an oil glut may be forming as massive supply drops onto the world market.

This is a shift that I have been extremely skeptical about, largely because I have doubted the US-Iran deal - technically an MoU - from the beginning. The doubt stemmed from Iran’s insistence it would charge tolls in the Strait of Hormuz, which America has outright rejected, and equally significant, the dozens of mines Iran has laid down in the Strait of Hormuz, which could take months to clear. As long as those mines remain, insurance firms will be extremely cautious to underwrite policies, limiting freighter movements.

Now, with the US-Iran war effectively restarting, likely to see Israel joining the fighting in the coming days, and throwing a dark shadow over Lebanon, energy movements through the Strait of Hormuz could (again) freeze.

But, in tandem, Ukraine’s bold drone strikes on Russia are igniting a separate energy emergency in Eurasia as Central Asia reels, Europe’s potential trade clash with China might cause Beijing to shutter clean energy exports to the continent (i.e., 100% of solar panels in Europe are Chinese) in the middle of a historic heatwave, and the previous energy crises that spread in Asia, where India called on citizens to work from home while South Korea mulled “car rationing” on roads, could very well be reignited.

This would make the previous energy crisis that began after February 28 look like a walk in the park.

The world may soon be gripped by multiple energy crises in different parts of the globe that together, push economies and societies to the brink. Adding to this, the backup oil reserves that provided cushion over the past few months are quickly being drained.

The US Strategic Oil Reserves, for example, are at their lowest level in 40 years. And those in an “insecure state,” like the Philippines, are turning to larger economies, like Japan, for oil aid, creating an additional layer of pressure for countries with vast reserves (i.e., Japan’s stockpiles could sustain the nation for around 250 days).

And, to make matters worse, as the Strait of Hormuz returns to being a battlefield, the knock-on effect will be amplified, namely global helium shortages critical for semiconductor production (around 25% of the world’s helium passes through Hormuz), and separately, food production as fertilizer costs surge or supply disappears (around 25%-35% of the world’s seaborne fertilizer flows through Hormuz). Remember, just a few months ago, the UK was preparing for food shortages as a worst-case scenario.

Unlike in the past, when there was hope for an offramp, today, there is zero clarity on how and when this war will end. Even the White House is reportedly preparing for a prolonged war over the Strait of Hormuz.

Should Iran unleash more devastating strikes, like the attacks on Qatar’s LNG facilities which have knocked (at least) 17% of the nation’s production offline for up to five years, the situation could rapidly deteriorate, potentially putting Arab states in a similar state as Russia, requiring energy assistance, and creating a separate headache as Arab capitals fume at the US and Israel and the cracking of the regional economy.

Of course, in the current geopolitical climate, nothing is guaranteed. Tomorrow, the US could very well signal a fresh round of talks with Iran. The next day, renewed fighting. But unless a clear direction to resolution is set, the back-and-forth is not sustainable. Energy supplies are drying up and new inventory is struggling to reach buyers. A new phase of the US-Iran war is beginning, and the outcome may not just be an energy crisis or emergency, but the opening acts of an energy war, as governments move the chess pieces to secure the nation.

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

A massive geopolitical shift has occurred: after decades of unity, underpinned by the Western alliance, NATO is fracturing.

The story starts at the recent G7 in France, and a bunch of “hot mic” moments, like the EU Council President António Costa saying “we are friends again” while speaking to US President Donald Trump and Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni.

The friendship did not last long.

Right after the G7 ended, the US and Italian leaders collided, after Trump claimed Meloni “begged” him for a photo, and wants to be friends because she is lagging in the polls, all after rejecting America’s request to use Italian bases to strike Iran. Meloni hit back, rejecting the claim, questioning the rationale of Trump’s accusation, and defending Italy’s position on the Iran war.

That should have been the end of it.

Except, then unexpectedly, the head of NATO, Mark Rutte, speaking on US television said that Italy gave “massive support” to the US during the Iran conflict, allowing 500 US planes to take off from Italian bases. Rutte only had good intentions, attempting tell Washington that Rome was its friend and defuse the Trump-Meloni spat.

But the opposite occurred. Italy has rejected Rutte’s claim. Rutte’s comment has created an unfortunate optic: the head of NATO is (almost) picking the US over Europe and Italy.

In the backdrop, French President Emmanuel Macron’s remark in April continues to ring: the EU joint-defense clause is stronger than Article 5 in NATO, signaling that European nations will defend each other far more effectively than with the inclusion of the US (and Canada).

What is happening between the US, Italy, and NATO is not surface level. It is taking place on the eve of the upcoming NATO summit in Turkey, one that is sure to see European nations pledge more spending to meet America’s (almost constant) security demands. However, in parallel, NATO itself is fracturing as Western nations view one another through a new lens. It is the latest signal that the West, as a bloc, is entering a new phase of division and separation.

NATO is on the same trajectory as the UN, WTO, and other global groups that today stand on the sidelines of global affairs as countries huddle in more exclusive settings (i.e., Board of Peace > UN). Within a short time, NATO may simply be a banner that the West stands under. However in reality, by the end of the decade, Europe could have a sovereign security architecture and America could roll back its umbrella from the continent, or only defend ideologically-aligned states.

The pulse of the “old NATO” is slowing. A new, fractured NATO is taking life.

Yes, China and Russia will be salivating.

However, this is not just a story about defense and security. It is about the global economic architecture too. The more the US and Europe collide and disconnect on defense, the more they will part ways in other theatres too, from technology to capital.

The more the West fractures, the more the global economy will be governed by competing ideas, corridors, and rules. Nothing is occurring in isolation. A breakdown in Western security will have a knock-on effect for trade and capital.

In today’s world, the winds of geopolitics are quickly turning friend to foe and foe to friend. The list of “triggers” for geopolitical events is quickly expanding.

A post on social media, a remark by the head of NATO, and a far more unilateral America, are all having the same effect: a breakdown in the established order and systems that spin the world.

And, in particular, what is taking place between the US and Italy is likely to reinforce the spreading rationale in Paris, Berlin, Rome, and London, that dependency on the US is now a clear and present danger. That for Europe, America is entering a strange new place between ally and adversary, companion and competitor.

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

China has announced what can only be described as the biggest national security crisis in America’s modern-history: it has developed an AI model equal to Mythos, the frontier system from Anthropic, that was effectively banned outside the US.

Why does this matter?

Last week, a ranking US senator revealed that Mythos hacked “almost” the entire National Security Agency (NSA). Yes, read that again. Mythos was able to identify (and potentially exploit) vulnerabilities across one of America’s most important intelligence agencies. This is why America banned access to Mythos. If Mythos landed in the hands of US adversaries, it would be a cyber security nightmare.

Yet, if China is to be believed, America’s ban is not the end of the road.

China now has an AI system that can replicate Mythos.

My hunch: China has had this system for a while, and is only now unveiling it at a strategic geopolitical moment.

At the tactical level, this raises the probability of a hack unlike anything the world has seen so far. If China’s AI model can also “break” the cyber security architecture of Western intelligence agencies, government ministries, and private sector organizations, nothing is secret. Remember in 2014 when the FBI warned that every large American businesses had already been hacked by China. China’s latest AI breakthrough could put that on steroids.

However, at a more strategic level, the world is inching toward a new model for global trade: geopolitical ceilings.

The US, China, and others, may refuse to give “others” access to their most coveted innovations because of what they could unleash: a loss in power and control.

This is counter to the post-1945 behavior, where governments, particularly Washington, used innovation as a vehicle to drive global power (i.e., the more the world became hooked on Twitter, iPods, and the Internet, the deeper the world integrated into the US architecture).

But now, what is looming are ceilings - effectively innovation limits - determined by the geopolitical climate.

The rise of “geopolitical ceilings” that ban the export of innovations, or throttle them for the global marketplace, changes how the global economy functions.

Most organizations have grown in a world of “pay-to-play.” If they had the resources, they could access any technology, platform, or system. Yet, what is looming now is inaccessibility regardless of price/cost because of geopolitics.

American businesses may have access to sophisticated AI tools that everybody else outside the US does not have. This is more than a trade wall. This is a strategic disadvantage, on the back of geopolitics and AI. And if the US and China introduce geopolitical ceilings, so too, India, Russia, Japan, Israel, and the EU will too. Few may give full access out of fear of emboldening their competitors and adversaries.

The new way to build global power may be to close off innovations, not open them up. This is an inversion, fueled by geopolitical insecurity.

And the outcome is a global fracturing in economic productivity and business competition. Origin now matters more than ever. Originate from the “right” nation, and gain the power to rule. Originate from the “wrong” nation, and face defeat before the game has even begun.

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

FAANG is yesterday’s paradigm. MANGOS misses the mark by a long shot. Instead, the new basket to follow is what I call “MAGNOTHS” (Microsoft, Anthropic, Google, Nvidia, OpenAI, TSMC, Huawei, and SpaceX).

Yes, more than one of these companies is not public. And that is the point.

Investors are looking at the global economy (and opportunities) through an old lens. The next phase of the global tech/AI buildout is increasingly state-controlled and highly geopolitical.

To truly seize on technology, investors must heed a new reality: companies like Huawei are at the core of the global economy. They are fully private, and their deals threaten to disrupt portfolios. In markets across the globe, Huawei is not just offering a product. It is offering an end-to-end Chinese tech stack, from hardware to software, edging out American firms like Nvidia.

Equally important: firms like TSMC are the backbone of firms like Nvidia, and therefore, the AI buildouts of OpenAI and others. And, TSMC is in the eye of the storm as America’s security commitments to Taiwan waver, potentially giving China carte blanche over the island. Investors must now bet on a firm that could be at the frontlines of war in the blink of an eye. Suddenly, the world’s most critical technology company is also the world’s most vulnerable, challenging the old tenet: nobody got fired for buying IBM. But what about buying TSMC?

Adding SpaceX is not about a potential $1.8 trillion IPO. It is about where the geopolitical arena is shifting.

Yesterday, it was about 5G and TikTok. Soon, it is going to be about space.

In a few short years, the new backbone of the global economy will no longer be underwater internet cables ferrying data, but the ever-growing constellations of satellites from competing governments (i.e., US, China, EU) powering nations from the top down (no pun intended).

Firms like SpaceX are not following in the footsteps of the old tech vanguards like Amazon or Netflix. SpaceX is quite literally a geopolitical stakeholder from the get-go, on the same level as nation-states. Buying SpaceX means holding a company that is entering and exiting flashpoints at its own discretion.

Then there is a separate issue with the old paradigms.

FAANG and MANGOS are both completely US-centric.

Yet, in today’s global climate, America is not the only technology champion. China is also at the head of the pack. In fact, in some areas, China is beating the US, ironically, within America itself.

A growing number of US firms are turning to Chinese LLMs over cost (American models are more expensive). Tokenomics is driving the competitive edge of Chinese AI companies. And, now, it is literally building China’s AI power.

For now, it is MAGNOTHS with the inclusion of China. But, as sovereign ideas drive tech funding, R&D, and ultimately deployment, they will give rise to new sovereign tech stacks, amending or expanding MAGNOTHS.

Surrounding all this: the success of MAGNOTHS, and the broader tech and AI world will not be defined or influenced by investors and market rallies like in the past. The very metrics that investors look at businesses through are in flux because of something I have been warning about for a few years now: governments cannot let their tech firms collapse in the current geopolitical landscape.

What Wall Street views as a flop, Main Street may view as critical. The new metrics go beyond how innovative a business is, growth in customer base, or burn rate.

It is also about how much “support” a business has from the state or how “integrated” a business is with the geopolitics of a nation. Look at Intel. Today, the company is a sure bet, not because of any product it has launched, but because the US government is backing the company in a push to rebuild American chip sovereignty (and manage China).

Most investors are looking at acronyms like FAANG, MANGOS, or MAGNOTHS wrong.

These are no longer pure investment baskets driven exclusively by opportunity, growth, and returns. Increasingly, geopolitics is at the center of them, reflecting the very motto of my business: Geopolitics First.

For decades, the savvy investor could spot market opportunities before others and steer clear of chaos. Today, the savvy investor is one who understands the new dance between geopolitics and markets, and how, increasingly, success in markets requires a mastery of world affairs. MAGNOTHS is the start of that.

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

Buy Now

Wars. Chokepoints. Nationalism. Tariffs. AI. Angry Gen Z.

The world is awash with disruption. The old structures, systems, and alliances are being dismantled. Nations are moving in opposite directions to secure the future. From rival economic corridors to weaponized supply chains, regions are being torn apart as governments move to call the shots and block rivals.

This is not fragmentation. This is a fracturing of historic proportions.

This is a Great Fracturing.

My new book, “The Great Fracturing: How Geopolitics Is Breaking the World,” reveals:

• Fractured Landscape: How new, clashing projects, from new forms of connectivity to AI governance, are turning the world into a jungle.

• Hidden Causes: Why nations have become angry at the old order and what brought governments to the doorstep of this systemic break.

• Next Risks: Hidden threats that will shape the global economy over the coming decades.

• Future Scenarios: The next chapter of the Great Fracturing, spearheaded by geoeconomics, sovereignty, and hard power.

• Re-Americanization: A roadmap for America to keep leading as the established order crumbles.

Buy Now

The old world is dead. A new, fractured world is forming.

The Great Fracturing is a window into the new wiring of the global economy and the world. There is no going back to what was. Lazy paradigms like “geopolitical recession” or “supercycles” are useless. Geopolitical strategies like nearshoring or diversification have reached their limit. The West no longer guarantees stability; and the rest are starting to play be a different set of rules.

A new era has begun. A new status quo has formed. Everything is fracturing, separation and division are forming everywhere, and control of the future is suddenly up for grabs.

Buy Now

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

Last week, Russia held its annual St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF). One session, mapping out the biggest threats to Russia till 2050 (mid-century), discussed fifteen different scenarios divided between geopolitics, demographics, technology, and more.

In the good basket of scenarios: Russia annexes Kyiv, the EU breaks apart, and Russian ideology prevails against the West. In the bad basket, Russia loses the war in Ukraine, and Ukraine joins NATO.

In the middle basket, Moscow uses nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe related to the ongoing war. Yes, the probability of a nuclear exchange is rising.

Regardless of the basket, and whether or not they consciously realize it, Russia’s intellectual brass views the future through a single lens: The Great Fracturing.

In the backdrop of that, zero-sum thinking is returning to geopolitics. There is a different phrase for this, what I call “Geopoliticalmaxxing,” where nations are taking the most extreme approach to how they conduct themselves and think about the future.

Russia is not alone in Geopoliticalmaxxing.

The US threats, like taking control of Greenland or the Panama Canal, the blockade around Cuba, the move against Maduro in Venezuela, and the ongoing war in Iran, all point to American hard power being used in the most extreme ways. The Iranian weaponization of the Strait of Hormuz and the Yuan-denominated toll-booth, while no longer surprising, is exactly the “nuclear scenario” many envisioned if the US and Iran went to war: Tehran closes the critical chokepoint. This has happened; Iran has played its most radical card.

The most extreme ideas are being tabled or played.

The era of Geopoliticalmaxxing will not follow Lookxmaxxing or other types of “maxxing” that are taking over the mainstream. Those are likely to fizzle out. However, Geopoliticalmaxxing is likely to snowball.

This changes the calculations for the world.

Most investors and policymakers are still viewing geopolitics through the lens of “incremental changes.” In today’s world, incremental means a tariff here, a tech sovereignty push there, a new bloc here. But, Geopoliticalmaxxing points to rapid escalation. It points to nations going for the jugular right away or planning for their enemies to do so, pushing them to take new action from trade to economy to AI.

What sets Geopoliticalmaxxing apart from traditional geopolitics is that nations are no longer holding their highest cards in reserve. They are leading with them. The era of "escalation ladders" is collapsing. A new game of prey or predator has begun.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Subscribe now

Share

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

*”GEOPOLITICAL IPO” is a concept/expression of Abishur Prakash.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.

-Abishur Prakash aka “Mr. Geopolitics”

Previous video ⬇️

Subscribe now

Share

Have questions or ideas? Let’s talk: abishur at mrgeopolitics dot com

Mr. Geopolitics is the property of Abishur Prakash/The Geopolitical Business, Inc., and is protected under Canadian Copyright Law. This includes, but is not limited to: ideas, perspectives, expressions, concepts, etc. Any use of the insights, including sharing or interpretation, partly or wholly, requires explicit written permission.