India Rupee 20260416

Progression Upwards for Indian Rupee and Catalysts

USD/INR Persistent Trajectory Remains in Force and Mid-Term Concerns

As of this writing the USD/INR is within the 93.2000 vicinity. The price of Gold is around $4,810.00 and Silver close to 79.50. Importantly, WTI Crude Oil is trading around $89.25. Global markets have turned in solid performances the past two weeks, this has been a two step progression for most investors. 

Indian financial institutions began to digest their worries regarding the Iranian war late in March – perhaps acknowledging the risks and ramifications, while adjusting outlooks. Then on Tuesday the 7th of April the establishment of a ceasefire was announced. However, after hitting a low of around the 92.2200 realm on the 8th of April, the USD/INR is back within higher ratios.

USD/INR Six Month Price Chart as of 16th April 2026

Yes, the USD/INR had been traversing above the 95.0000 ratio late in March, so it can be said the Indian Rupee has gotten stronger. Yet, there will not be many willing participants who will join a parade with the belief this lower trend can be sustained. The bullish trajectory of the USD/INR is not going to vanish.

On the 24th of October 2025, the USD/INR was near 87.7500. At this time last year the currency pair was close to 85.5000. A persistent and long-term move higher has been the theme in the USD/INR. Weakness in the Indian Rupee has been part of India’s economic story rather consistently for a handful of years. 

Narendra Modi has been in power since 2014, he is serving his third term as Prime Minister. His political party the BJP clearly has its chosen people within the Reserve Bank of India.

The government’s position of allowing the Indian Rupee to be weaker is not something they will want to state out loud as part of their mandate, but it is clearly not bothering them.

The pursuit of creating a stronger industrial and manufacturing base for India, including IT and software via good exchange rates for international clients is seen as a cornerstone to build demand. The quality of work and technology provided by the Indian workforce is good and this allows global clients to foster solid relationships with Indian companies.

However, the rise of the USD/INR to above the 95.0000 level in late March was a warning sign, that sometimes price velocity in Forex can become dangerous. And the Iranian war although enjoying a week and half of less noise, still could escalate into a problematic scenario for India that could cause additional concerns in Indian financial institutions who are trying to gauge their mid-term outlooks.

The USD/INR is an important part of this economic math and the prospect that higher energy costs, or in a worst case scenario – shortages incur hardship for Indian citizens and companies is an actual concern.

The current situation in the Hormuz Strait and availability of Crude Oil is significantly important for India. So is supply of LNG (liquefied natural gas) which Qatar, Oman and the UAE play a role. The supply of energy presents a glaring dark shadow for the prospects of the Indian economy should there be shortfalls. 

The 93.5000 resistance level has been durable since early April in the USD/INR. Stability of the exchange rate is crucial for a wide range of business in India, including banking and financial institutions active in the Bombay stock market – particularly since a weaker India Rupee opens the door to Forex concerns for foreign investors who do not have the ability to hedge if they are exposed via the INR too much. Foreign investors are needed in the Nifty indices to help values.

The near-term is likely going to remain a difficult path for the USD/INR and its outlook. The positive sentiment which has prevailed the past couple of weeks has been welcome and certainly stable conditions are hoped for so equilibrium can be kept. However, if the Iranian situation manifests into open military conflict again, or if there is a disruption of supply of energy that cannot be easily solved by India – then the USD/INR could once again face price velocity upwards that is uncomfortable.

While China may be getting the headlines regarding potential ramifications of its Crude Oil supply being threatened, India is estimated to have consumption that is ranked as the 3rd biggest globally. India’s ability to get a supply of energy from a diversified stable of sources is a key for the nation moving forward. 

The USD/INR will continue to move higher, the question is how fast? A slow steady rise in the currency pair – again, this will not be a spoken mandate by the Indian government – will continue. The fear of a rapid debasement is a concern. Financial institutions in India need steady emotions and are certainly hoping for the Iranian war to conclude with a sliver of optimism. 

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Negotiation 20260415

Checkmate: Who is Afraid of Negotiations?

President Trump has Laid a Trap for Iran and China

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 15th of April via The Angry Demagogue.

Both the defeatist camp and the “victory now” group see the advent of negotiations between the United States and Iran as a defeat for the United States and Israel. The argument by the defeatists is that victory was supposed to be quick and now we are stuck and looking for a way out since no one saw Iranian use of the Straits of Hormuz coming. The defeatists claim that only negotiations can end the conflict and anyway, Iran never should have been considered an enemy so the United States and Israel have overemphasized Iranian danger. The defeatists do not want a military victory and assume defeat as the moral choice.

For the victory now group, negotiations are seen as a weakness by the United States and Israel since a further pummeling of Iranian military and civil assets is the only thing that will guarantee a non-nuclear Iran incapable of threatening their neighbors – and the Straits of Hormuz. If there is no regime change, this group says, then there is nothing left to do except continue fighting until the regime falls or until there is nothing left for them to fight with.

A third group sees tactical victory and strategic defeat – or at least strategic stalemate which has forced both sides to the negotiating table meaning for the United States and Israel it is at least a temporary defeat since a stalemate is not victory.

Which if any of these assessments are correct? Or is there a third explanation that says that the negotiations themselves are a victory even if the absolute goals of the war, removing Iran from the Chinese-Russian axis has yet to be accomplished. We won’t retread the arguments about how much punishment the Islamic Republic has endured nor will we agree that as long as they have one missile launcher and enough Kalashnikov’s to stay in power there is no victory.

However, we do agree as we argued in The Art of the (Middle Eastern) Deal, that negotiations done incorrectly will be a precursor to defeat. Each time there is a rumor of continued negotiations there is panic from the victory now crowd, assuming that this time, President Trump will cave into Iranian demands. The defeatists on the other hand assume that the fact of negotiations is a good thing since military defeat is assured. The Macron-Starmer wing of the defeatists are trying to pretend to be the grownups in the room, as they want to be part of the opening of Hormuz but not be on “either side”. Their attempt to insert themselves into the situation but not on “either side” puts them a step or two below Pakistan but maybe one level above Sanchez’s Spain in influence.

Back to the real world. While the negotiations are between two countries and hosted or mediated by a third, there are two other countries involved on the Iranian side – China and Russia, and four on the American side – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and Israel. Each has its own interests and in general most of those mesh with the main participants in the talks. American allies need a non-nuclear Iran that is weak enough that it can’t threaten those countries and America has the same interests. Although a non-Islamist regime would be the best guarantor of that, it is not something that can be done only from the outside.

Russia and China need an American defeat more than anything especially after the world has witnessed the poor performance of their weaponry. They will try to re-arm Iran in order to create a war of attrition with the United States that America will be forced to end. This is where the interests of Russia and China clash. Russia would love the damage if not the destruction of Persian Gulf oil fields and refineries but the subsequent rise in oil prices would further damage China’s increasingly fragile economy. If Putin’s Russia has a goal of survival, self-enrichment and embarrassing the west (one seems to go with the other for Putin) and China’s goal is to dominate the Indo-Pacific, then the survival of Iran is a nice to have for Russia but a need to have for China.

China does not have the will and/or ability to do what is necessary to defend their Iranian ally, so they are really in a no win situation without a nuclear Iran. The American insistence on a complete end to the Iranian nuclear program is a shot right at the Chinese global strategy. Without the Iranian nuclear umbrella, China will depend on the United States for the flow of oil to their country.

As for Iran, they have one goal in this war and that is to survive with enough firepower intact to continue their quest to destroy Israel, rid the middle east of the United States and eventually to bring the Sunni Arab states in the Gulf under their thumb. As opposed to a dictatorship that is “only” corrupt and can be bought, they also need their theological goals met – and that starts with the destruction of Israel and genocide of the Jews. That, like Hitler’s Germany is an aim greater than the goal of winning the war.

They have come to the negotiating table because they felt that a continued bombing attack by the U.S and Israel and possibly the Gulf states risks their goals more than negotiating. This is the same reason that Hamas agreed to release the hostages as they saw the needed respite from the IDF in order to retain control of at least part of Gaza. This could be seen as Iran’s last ditch effort to survive and are using the cease fire to reconstitute their industry, re-arm and most important – to dig out and reach their underground missile cities

So why has the United States come to the negotiating table? Is it a show of weakness? An attempt to re-arm and bring more troops to the region? Is there a regime change plan that needs time to take share?

As for the last of these, over that last two days there have been car bombs and shootings at Basij checkpoints and the commander of Basij forces of Teheran has been assassinated. There is clearly something going on inside of Teheran and the head of the Mossad, David Barnea stated yesterday that the Iran mission will not end until there is regime change. Not only are the IRGC using the cease fire to regroup, so, it seems, is the opposition.

In addition to continued operations in Iran, the blockade of the Straits of Hormuz, an act of war in itself, tells Iran not to see negotiations as a sign of weakness by the United States, but rather as an opportunity for the US to widen their attacks beyond bombs and missiles.

The move from bombing to negotiations have trapped both Iran and China in a place where neither can win unless the U.S, against all statements by the President, VP, Secretary of State and Secretary of War, decides to fold.

Iran is trapped in a place where if they starts to shoot they will have their economy in worse shape than it is now and they no longer are lords of the Straits of Hormuz – THE trump card (no pun intended) that the defeatists have been gloating about.

China is trapped in a place where they need the United States to guarantee their flow of oil and their ally is no longer able to sell it to them on the cheap.

Negotiations have taken away the two things that were pressuring America and its allies – Iran’s daily missile attacks and their veto over the Straits of Hormuz. While they are using the time to try and rebuild what has been destroyed, that will take so long that, assuming no surrender by the United States, will be irrelevant to this war and the next -if there is one.

President Trump and the United States have set a trap for Iran and China and there does not seem to be a good way out. That doesn’t mean Iran will recognize it and end their genocidal quests, but it does mean that their path to victory has been shut down.

Checkmate?

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

postN87

AMT Top Ten Miscellaneous Morsels for the 12th of April 2026

Optimistic Hopes Appear Ready to Fade into the Distance

10. B-ball: The NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship concluded early last week with a rather resounding outcome for the University of Michigan who won their 2nd Men’s trophy, the first one coming in 1989. Michigan dismantled the Arizona Wildcats and then handled the Connecticut Huskies. The NBA playoffs will start this coming week. The Oklahoma Thunder and the San Antonio Spurs are getting a lot of attention, and the Denver Nuggets might have something to offer.

9. Trump: A week of optimism now leads towards threats of additional noise. Peace talks held in Pakistan appear to have failed this weekend, and now another countdown has begun as the Iranian conflict appears ready to escalate. The U.S White House and President Trump will certainly make more noise in the coming days.

AMT Top 10 for the 12th of April 2026

8. Logistics Advertising: Kit Kat and Nutella have been rewarded with massive exposure. The Kit Kat truck heist of 12 tons of product (reportedly said to be in a special F1 designed candy bar theme) made headlines. Kit Kat’s owner, Nestle, was obviously content with the free publicity and proof of demand. And a jar of Nutella floated across the Artemis 2 spacecraft unexpectedly this week, gaining international attention and sparking smiles from fans of the Italian chocolate hazelnut spread.

7. Creator: Yet another candidate accused of being Satoshi Nakamoto has been produced. Blockstream’s CEO Adam Back has been named by the N.Y Times as a potential creator. In the meantime, the real question is whether anyone but Iran (as they run their illicit shadow economy), Michael Saylor of MSTR and a few big whales consisting of institutions and hedge funds are really paying any attention to BTC anymore. The BTC/USD price as of this morning is around $71,600.00. Bitcoin was traversing near $126,000.00 in the first week of October 2025.

6. Greenback: USD/JPY 159.240, EUR/USD 1.17225, USD/ZAR 16.38540, USD/INR 93.0480. USD centric strength may prove solid this coming week and other currencies may suffer a bit.

5. Sideways Shimmer: Gold finished the week near $4.745.00, roughly $100.00 above its starting point last Monday. U.S 10-Y Treasury yields went into this weekend around 4.34%. Shifting outlooks this coming week will likely ignite turbulence in both assets.

4. Blind Eyes: More than a handful of U.S politicians have been featured as big winners regarding their stock trading abilities. Their gains far exceed the winning percentages of the overall returns made by indexes (as a benchmark). Little has been done to stop what many view as insider trading. There are many forms of political corruption around the world. However, a variety of places and people, including Americans seem to accept this potential misconduct. The ‘Stop Insider Trading Act’ has been brought forth in the House of Representatives and Senate, but the legislation may simply meet a slow death and disappear.

3. Inflation: U.S interest rates via the Federal Reserve will be held in check at a minimum over the next few months. The higher costs of energy will certainly seep into prices for transportation, manufacturing and agriculture. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell may be quite content to leave his position May the 15th. The next Fed FOMC interest rate decision is due on the 29th of April.

2. Strait of Hormuz: WTI Crude Oil closed above $90.00 going into this weekend. When futures markets open early on Monday, the price of the commodity is likely to rise via increased anxiousness which will build into the mindsets of large players today because of the failure of peace talks in Pakistan. The price of Crude Oil remained high last week, only moving to a low of around $85.00 this past Tuesday, showing cautious attitudes remained. Prices above $100.00 will likely become a new target quickly for some who bet. Will an early spike upwards this week then start a counter reversal lower, or will a climb become sustained?

1.  Risk Off: The S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 will get plenty of attention this coming week as behavioral sentiment remains fragile. Having skirted near its 200-days moving average lows in recent weeks, the indices have gained handsomely since the 31st of March. Will the upwards momentum come to an abrupt end this week, or have financial institutions been able to digest their nervousness and will they show a capability of remaining buyers?

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Universe 20260409

Foreign Exchange and Reading Through the Noise

Brief Clarity, Constantly Interrupted: What Does Copernicus Have To Do With FX?

This article was first published the 7th of April on LinkedIn by the author.

I have spent most of my professional life in foreign exchange markets – an environment that rewards the ability to read signal through noise. And yet the older I get, the more I find myself drawn to a question that no Reuters terminal can answer: why do intelligent, well-resourced people, working inside some of the most information-rich institutions ever created, still systematically misread reality?

I think the answer has less to do with the quality of our data, and more to do with the nature of our frameworks.

The Ptolemaic Trading Floor

In the sixteenth century, Copernicus did not discover new stars. He did not build a better telescope. He simply stood in a different place and looked at the same sky – and from that different vantage point, the complexity that had been accumulating for centuries suddenly resolved into something simpler and more true.

The philosopher Thomas Kuhn, writing about this in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, made a point that has stayed with me. The Ptolemaic astronomers were not stupid. They were brilliant people doing extraordinarily sophisticated work, and their model of the universe – with its epicycles and equants – was genuinely good at predicting where the planets would be. By their own measures, they were succeeding. But the framework was self-sealing. Every anomaly became a problem to be patched rather than a signal that the whole edifice needed replacing. The epicycles kept accumulating.

I recognise that trading floor.

The VAR models, the correlation assumptions, the ratings frameworks that failed simultaneously in 2008 did not fail because the mathematics was wrong within the model. They failed because the model had pre-decided what reality looked like, and reality declined to cooperate. The framework had accumulated its own epicycles – its own patches and exceptions and special cases – and nobody had stood back to ask whether the whole structure still made sense.

This is what the economist Herbert Simon called bounded rationality – the idea that we make decisions within limits of information, time, and cognitive capacity. But I think there is a deeper form of boundedness that Simon’s original formulation didn’t fully capture. It is not just that we lack information within a given framework. It is that the framework itself determines what counts as information in the first place. The boundary is not cognitive – it is epistemological. The frame has pre-decided what reality looks like, and we optimize furiously within it, never suspecting there is anything outside.

This is framework-induced bounded rationality. And financial markets are one of its purest expressions.

The Filmiest of Screens

William James, writing in 1902, described something that has always struck me as one of the most quietly radical observations in the history of psychology:

“Our normal waking consciousness, rational consciousness as we call it, is but one special type of consciousness, whilst all about it, parted from it by the filmiest of screens, there lie potential forms of consciousness entirely different. We may go through life without suspecting their existence; but apply the requisite stimulus, and at a touch they are there in all their completeness.”

James was writing about mystical experience. But I think he was also describing something that every trader knows intuitively – that there are moments of genuine clarity, where the market’s structure becomes briefly, luminously obvious, and then the noise closes back in. Not constant confusion, but brief clarity, constantly interrupted.

What interrupts it? I think James gives us a clue, though the fuller answer comes from a tradition he was only beginning to encounter.

The Deluded Self and the Distracted Market

The Yogācāra school of Buddhist philosophy, developed in the fourth and fifth centuries, offers one of the most sophisticated maps of consciousness ever produced. It describes eight layers of awareness, from the basic sense consciousnesses up through something far more interesting – the seventh consciousness, called kliṣa-manas.

Kliṣṭa-manas is the layer of mind whose function is to construct and defend a sense of self. But the Yogācāra tradition makes a more precise and more troubling point than simply calling it deluded. By the time information reaches the seventh consciousness, it has already passed through the sense consciousnesses and the discriminating mind – each stage filtering, selecting, and coloring what gets through. The seventh consciousness is not distorting clean data. It is working with inputs that are already biased, and it has no way of knowing this. It constructs its picture of reality from pre-processed material, and then defends that picture as if it were direct perception. Try telling a QANON follower to get a vaccine jab.

The parallel to institutional behavior in markets is uncomfortable in its precision. Risk committees, house views, investment mandates – these are the kliṣṭa-manas of the trading floor. They exist, at least in part, to protect the institution’s sense of itself. The risk manager who cannot recommend a position that contradicts last quarter’s framework. The economist whose forecast must remain defensible to the committee. The trader who holds a losing position because admitting the loss means admitting the thesis was wrong. These are not failures of analysis. They are the seventh consciousness doing exactly what it was built to do.

And into this environment, the attention economy arrives as accelerant. Social media does not simply distract – it feeds kliṣṭa-manas directly. Likes, outrage, identity, tribal affiliation – all of it strengthens the self-constructing layer and weakens the capacity for clear perception. The signal-to-noise ratio in markets was already difficult. We have now built an entire industrial infrastructure for generating noise that feels like signal, because it flatters the self that is doing the perceiving.

Standing in a Different Place

The Yogācāra tradition does not stop at the seventh consciousness. Beneath it lies the ālaya-vijñāna — the storehouse awareness, a kind of ground-level consciousness before the self-construction begins. It is not a mystical concept, or not only that. It is a description of what perception might be like before the defending ego has finished processing it.

The best risk-takers I have encountered in markets seem to access something like this, in their better moments. A capacity to see the position as it actually is, without the framework that produced it colouring the perception. To hold a view lightly enough to abandon it when the evidence changes. Copernicus looking at the same sky and seeing something different – not because he had more data, but because he had momentarily freed himself from the inherited frame.

James was right that these states are parted from ordinary consciousness by the filmiest of screens. The Eastern traditions – Buddhist and Vedantic – have spent two and a half millennia developing systematic methods for thinning that screen. Western psychology, for all its extraordinary achievements, has been slower to take this seriously, often treating consciousness itself as a problem that better neuroscience will eventually dissolve. It may be that, in this respect, we are in the position of the medieval scholars encountering Arabic science – not lacking intelligence, but working within a framework that makes certain questions difficult to even formulate.

What This Has To Do With FX

Markets are reflexive. The moment enough participants adopt the same model, the model changes the thing it was measuring. The framework that produced clarity attracts capital, the capital erodes the edge, and you need a new framework. Brief clarity, constantly interrupted – not as a pathology, but as the structural condition of the thing itself.

The question is not how to achieve permanent clarity, which is probably neither possible nor desirable. The question is whether we can develop the capacity to notice when we are inside a framework rather than seeing through it – to feel the epicycles accumulating before the model breaks.

That capacity, I suspect, is less a matter of better data or faster processing, and more a matter of the quality of attention we bring to the screen. Which means the most important professional development available to a markets practitioner might not be in a CFA curriculum.

I am aware of the irony of writing this on LinkedIn, which is itself a highly effective delivery mechanism for kliṣṭa-manas. The seventh consciousness is nothing if not adaptive.

Note: The author works in foreign exchange markets and thinks too much.

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

India Insider GDP Savings and Investment 20260408

India Insider: Education, GDP and Personalized Growth a Difficult Balancing Act

Is India Still 'The Country of the Future'?

In 1991, when India’s foreign exchange reserves had dwindled to barely three weeks of import cover, the government pledged its gold to the Bank of England. It was a moment of humiliation and, paradoxically, of liberation as the crisis forced an opening that three decades of socialist planning had resisted. Fast forward into 2025: India is a $4.1 trillion USD economy, the world’s most populous nation, with a moon rover, a thriving startup ecosystem, and a digital payments infrastructure the developed world now studies with envy.

This article asks if India is still ‘the country of the future’ using the same growth determinants framework applied by Professor Manoel Bittencourt to Brazil, and argues that the answer lies not primarily in corruption (though it matters), not in policy failure (though that matters too), but in two structural features that resist easy reform: the vast informality of the Indian economy, and the depth of its inequality.

Does Growth Matter? The 70/g Rule Applied to India

Before diagnosing India’s problems, we must appreciate what it has already achieved. Using the 70/g rule which tells us how many years it takes for income per capita to double at a given growth rate – India’s average GDP growth of roughly 6.5% since 1991 implies a doubling of income every 11 years. That is extraordinary by historical standards.

But averages mask distributions. If growth accrues predominantly to the formal sector – the top 10% of earners who hold formal employment, own financial assets, and participate in the organized economy, then the 70/g rule tells a story of elite enrichment, not a broad based development. This is India’s core dilemma.

The Eight Growth Determinants: India in the Data

Bittencourt’s framework identifies eight standard growth determinants: savings, fertility, rule of law, government consumption, trade openness, education and health investment, inflation, and finance. Let us examine some of each through Indian data, with Brazil as our comparator.

Savings & Investment

India’s gross savings rate has historically been a strength hovering around 30–32% of GDP through the 2000s and 2010s. But the investment picture is more troubled. Fixed capital formation has declined since its peak around 2011–12, driven by a stressed banking sector, weak private investment appetite, and an infrastructure gap. Brazil shows a similar pattern of savings-investment divergence  but India’s gap has widened more sharply in recent years.

Gross Domestic Savings and Fixed Capital Formation. India vs Brazil. 2000-2023

Education & Health Spending

Perhaps nowhere is India’s “policy-delivery gap” more apparent than in social spending. India spends approximately 4.5% of GDP on education and just over 3% on health, and both figures are well below what comparable middle income countries invest. Brazil, despite its own fiscal struggles, consistently outspends India on health as a share of GDP. The consequences are visible in learning outcomes: the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) consistently finds that a significant share of Indian schoolchildren cannot read a simple paragraph or perform basic arithmetic.

This matters enormously for growth. An economy hoping to absorb millions of workers into formal, productive employment each year needs those workers to arrive with usable skills. When they do not, informal low productivity employment becomes the default  and cycles of informality perpetuate.

Government Spending on Human Capital. India vs Brazil. 2000-2023

The Thesis: Informality as Structural Trap

Bittencourt identified corruption as the growth killer in Brazil. For India, the more precise diagnosis is informality and the inequality it both reflects and reinforces.

Consider the arithmetic: approximately 80% of India’s workforce is informally employed who are working without contracts, without social protection, without access to formal credit, and largely invisible to the tax system. This informal mass produces perhaps 50% of GDP. The productivity gap between the formal and informal sectors is staggering, and it does not shrink naturally with overall growth.

Share of Workforce in Formal Employment. India vs Brazil. 2000-2023

Brazil is itself a country with significant informality, but its formal sector share has grown meaningfully since the early 2000s, driven by the expansion of the Bolsa Família program, minimum wage policies, and labor formalization drives. India, by contrast, saw its already small formal sector shrink as a share of total employment after demonetization in 2016 and the disruptions of COVID-19. The gap between the two countries on this metric is instructive.

Inequality: When Growth Passes People By

India’s Gini coefficient – a standard measure of income inequality – has risen over the reform era even as aggregate poverty has fallen.  It shows the signature of unequal growth. The bottom quartile has seen real income gains, but the top decile has captured a disproportionate share of the growth dividend. Recent estimates suggest that India’s top 1% now hold a larger share of national income than at any point since Independence.

Income Distribution India vs. Brazil.

Compare this to Brazil, which, despite its own severe inequality, pursued deliberate redistributive policies through the 2000s with Bolsa Família reaching 14 million families at its peak and a concerted minimum wage policy. India’s equivalents – the MNREGA rural employment guarantee, PM-Kisan farm payments are larger in coverage but smaller in benefit size at this stage, and reach informal workers imperfectly.

The Structural Complications

A purely data driven analysis, as Bittencourt himself acknowledged for Brazil, understates the depth of the challenge. India’s informality is not simply a policy failure, it is rooted in structures that predate modern economics.

The caste system, legally prohibited but still socially persistent, has historically sorted populations into occupational roles and those at the bottom of the hierarchy were systematically excluded from property ownership, formal education, and credit. Colonial de-industrialization destroyed the artisan economy that might otherwise have been a pathway to formal employment. The fragmentation of the federal system with 28 states running effectively different labor markets, land acquisition regimes, and social programs means that a policy that works in Tamil Nadu may fail in Uttar Pradesh.

These are not excuses. They are explanatory variables that any honest growth analysis must include.

What Does Growth Theory Tell Us to Do?

The prescription is not mysterious. If informality is the barrier, then the priority is to make formal employment more accessible through labor law simplification, portable social insurance that follows the worker rather than the employer, and a genuine skill based learning infrastructure that reaches the rural poor.

If inequality is the barrier, then the priority is redistribution that enhances human capital at the bottom – not cash transfers alone, but the quality of the school your child attends and the clinic your mother can access. India has the architecture of such systems; it does not yet have substantive results.

The demonstrators on India’s streets – whether farmers in 2020-21, or youth protesting paper leaks, or contract workers demanding permanence – know this intuitively. They are not asking for charity. They are asking to be absorbed into the formal economy that has prospered around them.

Conclusion: Is India Still the ‘Country of the Future’?

The answer to the question is Yes, and it is both an achievement and an indictment. India has built a moon program and yet cannot reliably staff a primary school. It has produced the world’s most used digital payments system and left 200 million people without bank accounts until recently. It exports software engineers to Silicon Valley, while its domestic labor market cannot absorb graduates at scale.

Brazil, our comparison, has struggled with its own version of this duality longer. But Brazil’s welfare state, however fiscally stressed has created a floor. India’s floor is thinner, and the drop beneath it steeper.

Informality is not the destiny for any developing economy. South Korea was deeply informal in the 1960s, China was an overwhelmingly rural agrarian nation in 1980. Both made transitions through deliberate, state led investment in human capital and formal employment creation. The path is known. The question for India in 2026 is whether the political will exists to progress via focused programs, or whether fifty years from now someone else will write another article illuminating the same structural problems.

Article Notes:

Data sources include the World Bank World Development Indicators, ILO Labour Statistics, Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, ASER Centre (India), UNESCO Institute for Statistics, and IMF World Economic Outlook. Growth determinant categories follow Barro (2008) as synthesized by Bittencourt.

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Markets Say 20260407

What Do the Markets Say?

Ambivalence Rules the Day

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 7th of April via The Angry Demagogue.

There is nothing we capitalists like saying more than “the markets say….”. What we mean is that the amorphous group of individuals and institutions that together form some sort of consensus as to the value of “things” taking everything known by the individuals involved into consideration. Since no one can know everything, the idea is that the market represents the sum of knowledge of everyone who has money to invest – or, as we like to say, “skin in the game”.

Below is a graph from the start of the war until April 2, of oil, gold, 10-Year U.S Treasury yields, American and European stocks. Each should tell us something and in general all together they should be saying the same thing. However – that is not the case here considering we are in the midst of a major Middle Eastern war, with China and Russia watching with interest and Western Europe squirming with unease.

Normalized at 100 via ChatGPT as source.

Those items that signify a flight to safety are the price of gold and the U.S Treasury yields, while those that signify a faith in the future of the economies are the index levels of the U.S and European stocks. A commodity that is directly affected, oil in this case, is expected to rise and it has, by over 50% since the start of the war.

While one would expect the price of U.S Treasuries to rise considerably as it is considered a “safe haven” by investors, it has risen just 4% as yields dropped from 4.31% to 4.13% (with bonds, prices and yields moving inversely. A rise in bond price is a decline is their yield – meaning they earn less for the bondholder). Gold, the other safe haven, though has dropped by nearly 12% since the start of the war. True enough, the price of gold has skyrocketed over the past year, but still while there is a reason why gold might underperform U.S Treasuries, it is odd that it has underperformed stocks on both sides of the Atlantic, in spite of the 50% increase in the price of oil – forcing up energy prices for industry. Stocks in the U.S have dropped by just 4.95% while in Europe the decline is just 5.8%. Neither number is one an investor wants to see in just six weeks, but all things considered the war has not caused a lack of confidence in the economies of the EU or the U.S.

People might claim that gold has lost its safe haven luster over the years, but that is not the belief of governments as India and China have been buyers of vast stores of gold and France decided to repatriate all of their gold reserves. They still see it as necessary.

So, what are the markets telling us about this war and the future of domestic and global economies? Regarding Iran, the supposed victors in this “quagmire”, the Iranian Rial has dropped 96.8% in 2026 and has moved from 0.00002378 to the dollar to an incredible 0.00000076 (that means that 1 million Iranian Rial equals 76 cents) the market speaks in one voice – no confidence.

Regarding the rest of the world the markets are not really telling us much of anything because there has not been a rush to safe havens as usually happens in wars and happened during Covid, nor has there been supreme confidence. The markets are, shall we say, ambivalent.

That volatility is high and that they move drastically on each Trumpian proclamation is more a sign that the algorithms that control the very short term market trends are mostly chasing the same thing. When X happens, sell Y is a race to the bottom by unthinking and unsophisticated (in spite of AI) analysis until that race causes the “when Y hits a certain price, buy it” or “when Z happens then buy A” algorithms kick in. After a few days or weeks, we can start to see trends as long as we ignore the record highs or lows. However, there is nothing other than “wait and see” ambivalence in the current market data.

While this does not necessarily mean that the “markets” are in support of the war, but neither does it see a debacle of any sort. The Libyan bombing campaign of 2011 lasted seven months with no real Western interests involved and the Kosovo ariel campaign of 1999 lasted around 3 months and involved humanitarian but not economic interests. The 6 weeks of this war, so far, is not at a level of “quagmire” for the markets.

If the markets are telling us anything now it is that while oil may stay high for awhile, the world is not heading south due to the war. This can change– for good or bad – but the markets themselves are not currently taking a stand either way. They are not telling us we are in for a rough ride. While we believe that this war will reshape global politics and alliances and create an economic boon for the victors, no one can be sure who will end up on top and who will suffer once the war winds down.

The defeatists around the western world could do worse than listen to what the markets are not telling us.

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

South African Rand 20260327

G7 Snub for South Africa and other Troubles for the South African Rand

USD Centric Strength and Global Anxiety Weighing on Value of Rand

The USD/ZAR is still above 17.00000 in early trading this morning, this as USD centric strength manifests globally due to anxiety which clearly exudes because of the ongoing Iranian war. The USD/ZAR is near the 17.11000 realm, with wide spreads via bids and asks.

The price of Gold is close to $4,450.00 and Palladium is around $1,395.00 – this after touching apex marks in late January when the $2,100.00 level was breached.

USDZAR Six Month Chart as of 27th March 2026

These metals are important for South Africa, but their daily values do not effect the USD/ZAR like they did in the past because of other complexities. The USD/ZAR which had enjoyed a stellar bearish trend and touched lows of 15.68000, late in January, could be correlated to the decrease in value to the precious metals by some, but this is likely false narrative.

When the larger picture of pure behavioral sentiment within the Forex broad market is looked upon other factors are a certainty. The South African Rand, in a rather healthy manner, is largely dependent on financial institutions outlooks regarding the USD, 10-Year U.S Treasury yields, and what the U.S Federal Reserve outlook projects.

The U.S central bank, which many people including myself, was thought to be in position in which the Federal Funds Rate would be lowered in the coming months, now faces complications due to what may become chronic higher energy costs through the mid-term if the war in the Middle East persists and inflation due to logistics, manufacturing and agriculture are effected.

The USD/ZAR near the 17.0000 is a good barometer of South African financial institutional attitudes. Yesterday’s news that South Africa will be excluded from the G7 meetings in France, which will be held in June, will not make folks in South African financial spheres content. However, these same people within the machines of corporate finance in South Africa have grown used to the vagaries of mismanagement, corruption and perceptions these cause for the nation. While some South African government officials initially said France had been pressured by the U.S to disinvite South Africa from the G7 summit, they have changed their tune this morning and are trying to downplay the exclusion as insignificant.

Thus, we return back to the USD/ZAR and near-term considerations. While the currency pair has shown the tendency to reverse lower when marks above 17.10000 have been challenged the past few weeks in March, this morning’s early trading which is sustaining higher values is troubling. The consideration that nervousness among global investors remains skittish at best is unsettling. Those who are making short and near-term wagers on the USD/ZAR are likely concerning themselves with the upcoming weekend and its unknowns. From a trading perspective, folks are usually cautious about taking speculative positions over the weekend when they fear there is a possibility of bad news.

The USD/ZAR is touching important resistance above, if calm doesn’t return to the broad markets across various international assets today, the currency pair may find itself testing higher realms as next week begins.

Looking for downside in the USD/ZAR may prove difficult to attain later today. Traders should keep their eyes on other gauges and watch the U.S 10-Year Treasury yields which are near 4.45% (highs that haven’t been seen since July of 2025), WTI Crude Oil prices and the major U.S equity indices which are in correction territories.

From a betting perspective, if U.S 10-Year yields escalate and the price of energy ebbs upwards today in commodity markets, and there is more trouble on the Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500, this will be problematic. The USD has been volatile, but has certainly shown a tendency to get stronger in recent weeks. A higher USD/ZAR above the 17.20000 is not out of the question.

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Indian Diaspora 20260325

India Insider: Why the Gulf Remains a Vital Economic Lifeboat

Indian Expat Labour and Recalibration Realities

The skyline of Dubai, once a symbol of untouchable prosperity, now sits under a shadow of regional recalibration. As Reuters recently noted, Dubai has successfully transitioned to a non-oil economy, with oil accounting for less than 2% of its GDP. It is now a powerhouse of trade, high-end real estate, and financial services. 

However, its “backyard” – the Strait of Hormuz – remains a strategic bottleneck. With 20% of global seaborne crude passing through this narrow vein, the recent tensions in March 2026 have forced a shift in perception: the Gulf is no longer an insulated sanctuary, including Dubai where millions of Indians work and earn for their families in India.

Indian Diaspora Gulf Representation

The scale of this “labour export” is enormous. As of early 2026, approximately 9.5 to 10 million Indians live and work across the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) countries. To put that in perspective, that is nearly the entire population of a country like the UAE, made up solely of Indian expats.

A Remittance Driven Economy

As per Government data sources, India remains the world’s top remittance recipient, with total inflows hitting a record $135.4 billion in the last fiscal year. And despite a rise in high-skilled migration to the US and UK, the GCC remains a juggernaut, contributing roughly 38% of India’s total remittances.

For states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Maharashtra, which receive nearly 50% of these total inflows, it is a macroeconomic stabilizer that funds the current account deficit and keeps the Rupee from a freefall.

India’s Labour Market Paradox

But here is the real question, if people return to India due to the crisis in the Middle East, are there any “good quality” jobs waiting for them in India? The honest answer is no.

Youth unemployment remains elevated, particularly among graduates. Engineers in mechanical and construction fields face limited opportunities. Outside IT, and to some extent automobiles, there are not enough stable, high-paying jobs.

So people adjust. You will find postgraduates working in delivery jobs and informal sectors. I have personally spoken to Amazon delivery workers who told me they hold M.A degrees, or that they had worked in Dubai or Singapore before Covid and are now trying to leave again. This is becoming norm nowadays.

Indian National Wages and Savings Compared to Expat GCC Averages

In many towns in India, migration itself has become an economic model. People move to Singapore, Malaysia, or the Gulf, and the money they send back drives real estate, consumption, and local business activity. In many such regions, the labour market feels tight, not because jobs are available, but because the workforce has already left.

The wage gap explains everything. A nurse or lab technician in India may earn ₹15,000–₹20,000 per month. The same person can earn close to ₹80,000 in the Gulf. A private school teacher in Villupuram city in Tamil Nadu state earns around ₹8,000.

While nominal wages are  2–2.5x higher in GCC, the true driver of migration is savings arbitrage , which can be 5–6x higher.

This reflects structural differences in labour productivity and capital intensity.

India has a large pool of educated labour. But instead of becoming an advantage, it has turned into a wage suppressing force. There is always someone willing to work for less. As a result, wages remain low and bargaining power stays weak.

Percent of India’s Remittances From The GCC

At the same time, we are told growth is strong. Yes, the labour force participation is rising, but inequality is also increasing. A large share of employment remains informal and unstable. Inflation continues to erode purchasing power, and disposable incomes remain under pressure.

Right now, for many Indians, prosperous conditions are easier to find outside the country. Yes, the Gulf has risks. However, geopolitical tensions will come and go, and these are short-term disruptions.

Structurally, GCC economies will stabilize and grow again, and when they do, the flow of Indian labour will continue to pursue these opportunities. Because until India creates enough high-quality jobs at scale, migration will not slow down.

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Iran What Losing Looks Like 20260323

Iran: What Losing Looks Like

Who is Losing Militarily, Technologically, Economically and Diplomatically?

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 20th of March via The Angry Demagogue.

It is difficult for many to admit that the US and Israel are winning the war and that conquering a country the size of France, Germany, UK, Netherlands and Spain together with only air power does not take a day or two. However, by any objective (meaning without thinking that all Trump/Bibi/Hegseth, etc. bad) standard, the allied coalition is systematically destroying the military industrial complex that is the Islamic Republic of Iran (what it is not is a State dedicated to the good of its citizens). People forget that the American air campaign in Gulf War 1 was 38 days. It started on January 17, 1991 and only by February 24 did the generals feel that they could invade and take Kuwait.

The air campaign then poured over 88,000 tons of bombs in approximately 100,000 sorties. And this to capture a country a bit smaller than New Jersey.

As we finish the third week of this war we can assess who is winning and who is not. We have spent this past week discussing what it means to be victorious in this war (The Economy and The Military) and to state unequivocally that victory is the moral choice no matter the price of oil. That being said, the price of oil is rising and hit $120 a barrel before dropping. Economists see $138 barrel as the price that could send the US into a recession. So far, the US economy is holding firm. The S&P 500 closed on the Friday before the war at 6740 and yesterday’s close was 6624 – a drop of about 1.7% – not the panic that the front pages would have us think. The Eurostoxx 50 is actually up slightly from 5719 to 5736.

The Federal Reserve did not cut rates, signifying that they don’t need to prop up the economy and risk inflation as they do when they fear a collapse.

The economies of the West seem strong in spite of (or because of?) the war which should end with the cessation of the 47 year of Islamic Republic price premium. The Russian and Chinese economies meanwhile will be under stress for quite some time. While China will have to wonder about its oil supply, Russia understands that $100 a barrel oil will encourage increased US production (and now Russian and Chinese free Venezuelan?) that will hurt them when oil prices go back to normal levels. As we will now discuss, Chinese and Russian arms deals might start to go south, too.

Technologically, this war is a further test of American and Israeli technology and abilities, and they have passed with flying colors. The American and Israeli missile and drone defense systems are outperforming what they did less than a year ago in the “12 Day War” and the U.S Navy is untouchable. The Gulf States are also fairing better than expected although due to the short distance and the lack of experience, they are getting hit more than Israel is. To top it off, the Russians have forced Ukraine to become global leaders in the defense against drones and there are now 2,000 Ukrainian anti-drone personnel in the Gulf States.

But is the air-forces that are performing so well, that one would think that the Iranians did not invest in the most advanced Russian and Chinese air-defense systems over the past few years. The S-300 or S-400 advanced Russian systems or the Chinese HQ-9B long range surface to air missile and the JY-26 (alleged) anti-stealth radar, are performing so poorly, the Chinese themselves must be hoping it is a personnel issue and not a technological one.

Speaking of personnel, this war has shown that pilot skill still matters. It is the bravery, daring and success of American and Israeli aviators that matters as much as the technology. Just look at the Gulf countries who fear sending their combined force of around 400 F-15’s and French Rafale fighters into the air.

The Russian air force (and army) has already shown it is lacking the skill to compete with even poorly trained Ukrainian pilots, let alone with American or Israeli aviators. The Chinese too, must be wondering if their air force, made up of untested, pilots from one-child families will brave the fire coming from Taiwan as well as the American and Japanese navies in order to complete their missions.

Technology is great – especially if it works as advertised, but if the “operators” are inferior, even great technology will not be up to par. No one yet has been able to match American and Israeli personnel, in the air or on the ground.

Which brings us to that annoying wild-card, the Straits of Hormuz. While the Iranians have not succeeded in closing the straits they are scaring off shipping to an extent that it is a concern not only for the present but for the future. By using this tool, by playing this card, if you will, Iran has forced the United States to make the security of the Straits a war aim. The success of the U.S operation in the Straits will turn it from an international waterway under the veto power of Iran to a U.S controlled and protected gateway from the Persian Gulf. In times of war with China the U.S Navy will be able to turn it into a Chinese energy chokepoint. If the U.S was not there prior to the Iranian gamble, they will be there now.

As for pure military, Iran is losing as no one has lost before. The combined forces have destroyed nearly all their production capabilities for military hardware, have destroyed air defenses, command and control centers, leadership on multiple levels and most of their navy. We don’t need much more to declare Iran the military loser.

Diplomatically, things are not as they appear. While no western European countries support the fighting or even the aims of the war, the Gulf States, India and others are quietly forming an unofficial coalition against regional terror. As Europe tries to figure out how to pacify its growing radical Moslem population, other counties, including Moslem ones, are finally realizing that terror against Israel and Jews slowly but surely works its way back to them. For fanatics, no one is religiously or ideologically pure enough, even if you are descended from Mohammed.

Western Europe is a clear diplomatic loser in this war as President Trump is the last person who will forgive their teachery and allow them to share in the spoils of this war. Their role in the Middle East and in global politics generally is done. Their ability to use their victory in WWI to determine and influence events around the world is finished even though they have now backtracked and agreed to help on the Straits of Hormuz issue.

Regarding China, they have now abandoned one of their main allies and the country they have depended on to provide them not only oil but a strong military presence in the Middle East. The war was clearly coming and just as the United States sent carrier groups to protect its and its allies’ interests, so too, could have China. They could have sent naval vessels to help defend Iran – or at least deter the United States but did not, either because they don’t have the ability to do it or they don’t have the will. In either case, China is a diplomatic loser in this war.

Russia is also losing the diplomatic game as Ukraine becomes closer to the Gulf states and Israel and America are neutering their best technology. Regarding Israel’s recent sinking of Iranian naval ships in the Caspian Sea, reports are coming out that they were laden with Russian military aid. Russia, like China, has not raised a finger to help their main Mideast ally, making it hard for them to claim the loyalty of other purported allies.

And Israel? Israel seems always to be a diplomatic loser, war or peace. However, this war has strengthened the bonds between the American and Israeli military in ways that no one could have foreseen just months ago. The cooperation and trust between the two militaries is beyond anything America has had since its partnership with the UK in WWII. Western Europe’s continued irrelevance on the global scene has lightened the pain the Israeli public feels for western Europe’s betrayal.

India on the other hand has tightened its ties with Israel as Prime Minister Modi’s pre-war trip to the country showed. As for the Gulf Countries, the UAE seems to be interested in strengthening its Israeli ties while Qatar does not. While Qatar is angry at Iran for their attacks it is not clear that this will lead them to abandon their goals of Islamicizing the West and ridding the world of Israel. Saudi Arabia is hard to call. We don’t expect any diplomatic breakthroughs especially if the Islamic Republic actually falls.

Israel we can say is neither a winner nor a loser, yet, in the diplomatic arena – which, considering the beating Israel gets on the world stage, might be called a win but most certainly is not a loss.

The United States can hardly be considered a diplomatic loser in this war as they are the only major power to be able to come to the aid of allies when U.S interests are also involved. The tough talk out of western Europe is a very small thorn in the side of the United States.

To summarize, Iran is the big loser of course as their support comes from a neutered Russia, an apathetic China and a global progressive left that has no power to influence, let alone determine events. Iran’s main allies have been proven ineffectual at best, uninterested at worst and their “brand” has been diminished no matter what else happens in the war.

The only part of the war that the United States and Israel can be said to be losing is the news and propaganda (but I repeat myself) war.

For the things that count though, one thing is certain – the United States and Israel are not the losers.

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

postN87

AMT Top Ten Thoughts and Trepidations for the 22nd of March, 2026

The Return of AMT's Top 10 Illustrious 'Weekly' Salvos

First we must congratulate those who were willing to climb out from under their rocks (and bomb shelters) to offer musings. But let’s not digress….. to the AMT Top Ten List we go.

AMT Top Ten for the 22nd of March 2026

10. March Madness: The NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship is underway. Some of the more hated schools remain catalysts. Our pick, the University of Arizona Wildcats. 

9. Bitcoin: Traversing above 68,000.00 USD currently almost feels like an accomplishment considering BTC/USD was near 63,000.00 in early February and again in early March. But do not blink your eyes. BTW, MSTR (the much loathed MicroStrategy by some AMT folks) went into this weekend below $136.00 per share.

8. South Africa: The USD/ZAR finished Friday near 16.96800 depending on bids and asks. On the 29th of January the currency pair was close to 15.65000. The South African Rand has done well over the long-term, but it is correlating to the broad Forex market concerns. Day traders should not take things personally, and accept that risk adverse moves – particularly as a major war rages is part of speculation. Near-term viewpoints can differ with long-term prospects. 

7. Not Glimmering: Gold at the start of the Iranian war was around $5,260.00, it has fallen to a mark of $4,491.00 this weekend. Showing gold’s speculative momentum beforehand hand, outmatched current values. Where next?

6. Silver: Above 120.00 USD briefly towards the end of January, the commodity is below 68.00. Wild betting has caused a drop of more than 42%. Too much exuberance.

5. Risks: U.S 10-Year Treasury Yields were below 3.95% on the 27th of February, via Friday’s close rates are above 4.38%. Can you spell f.e.a.r?

4. Safe Haven: The U.S Dollar Index which had been showing solid downside is near 99.500, on the 27th of February it was around 97.850 – a rather legitimate rise. 100.000 may be a target by some large players.

3. Shrieking Hyperbole: WTI Crude Oil prices are certainly getting plenty of attention. However, voices expressing concern about WTI touching higher values starts to sound like an auction in order to get attention for the circus barkers. WTI remains near 100.00 USD and this mark is a barometer. The price is high and it can go higher, but expressed fear about $140.00 and $200.00 should be treated with disdain in the near-term.

2. Iran War: The conflict in the Middle East cannot be downplayed, but it can become fearmongering by Cassandras’. The U.A.E is still open for business and other nations in the Middle East are functioning. Yes, there is noise and the situation can grow more dangerous. But the potential of freedom for the people of Iran is a solid goal, though some may find this naive until it is proven. Can it become fact?

1. Coming Attractions: U.S stock markets are rightfully nervous. Friday’s close for the S&P 500 has brought it into terrain that challenges its 200 day moving average. The combination of weak technical attitudes and behavioral sentiment is a dangerous mix. Risk management may not be enough for day traders to survive current conditions, sitting on the sideline instead of betting on equity indices intraday may be more efficient and less lethal.

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Iran: What Victory Looks Like Part 2 - The Military

Iran: What Victory Looks Like, Part 2 – The Military

Missiles, Drones, the Straits and Regime Change

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 17th of March via The Angry Demagogue.

In a recent X post, Edward Luttwak, the elder statesmen amongst strategists and one who we ignore at our own peril, stated that “The regime is impotent viz the U.S but all-powerful against its own people. So, regime change with bombs may fail but without bombs it might last for ever.” In other words, American and Israeli bombing is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic. Luttwak also made it clear that the Iranian people cannot overthrow the regime without native military support.

Not only will bombing not be sufficient to overthrow the regime, but American and Israeli commandos combined with Mossad and CIA operations will not be enough because for the Islamic Republic, internal, Iranian opponents of the regime are a bigger religious and ideological threat than Americans, Israelis or Sunni Arabs and they will always have enough Kalashnikovs and machine guns to kill 30,000 Iranians a night.

But regime change is not the only path to military victory. The mistaken views of the war when the opponents are “shocked”, Casablanca style, when they realize that wars are difficult and unpredictable and come with speed bumps, unexpected ups as well as downs and that not everything is in your control.

The first path to victory is one that is occurring now. That is the destruction of the military and command and control assets of the Islamic Republic. That focuses as we know, on the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and the “Basaj” – essentially the IRGC’s domestic militia who are responsible for keeping Iranian citizens in line and are, for the most part, ideological hardheads. With other types of dictatorships, the embarrassing way their military has handled Israeli and American attacks past and present would have been enough to topple them. However, with Shiite fanatics who know no borders (morally or geographically) and whose main enemies are domestic, that is not the case – and no one expected that to be the case.

The attacks must continue until either the regime changes or until their military-industrial infrastructure is destroyed. This means its drone and missile production, its naval forces, air-defenses and underground missile storage and nuclear facilities must be done away with. It does not mean the nearly impossible attempt to secure enriched uranium. Regime change can lead to cease fire and negotiations but without regime change the attacks must continue until the mission is completed.

The second path to victory is the opening and complete control of the Strait of Hormuz. While there still are ships that make it through, this is the one thing that the regime still holds over the United States and the world. The missiles they send to Israel and the gulf will be degraded enough if the bombings continue, but the Western world cannot allow a vicious, cruel dictatorship to control any waterway. Freedom of navigation is one of the key reasons why Taiwan is so important (which Japan knows well – making us wonder why it has not sent ships to help with the Straits) and a key reason this war must be fought. We wrote the other day about the price premium that the Islamic Republic holds over the world (and there was a Jerusalem Post article quoting Peter Navarro, head of the White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing state that the price premium is between $5-15 a barrel – we think that is understated). The Islamic Republic must be denied this ability to blackmail the world.

Of course, it seems that Western Europe is happier with the Iranian regime not losing, than with the American (or Israeli) government winning, but that is something to be dealt with later

The third thing that will bring a military victory is of course, regime change. First, the presence of a new leader on Iranian soil must be attained. This can either be the Shah’s son, Reza Pahlavi, who has been encouraging his countrymen to revolt and therefore needs to show real leadership by making his way home, or someone, possibly a senior military figure, who is in Iran now. Pahlavi is the natural choice, but he must take some risks and show he has the pull and prestige with at least part of the military in order to be able to accomplish the mission of overturning the regime.

In order for that to happen, circumstances must be created where a few divisions of the regular army can protect Pahlavi as he enters the country and he can lead the people to revolt. Once a few divisions defect and with American and Israeli air-power, they can liberate territory, further army divisions will probably join in – assuming they see a path to victory. A revolution need not happen overnight but can come with the army moving across the country and the defeat or defection of some in the IRGC. A few million in Swiss or Dubai bank accounts will also encourage defection.

Without a leader and an organized armed force, the regime just needs small weapons fire to put down any citizen revolt – and they will.

Military victory can come either with the destruction of the drone/missile capabilities and stockpiles along with the forced re-opening of the Strait of Hormuz or with regime change. If the former two, then the Iranian people will continue to suffer, but the Persian Gulf countries, Israel, the United States and the rest of the free world will not. If the latter, then everyone except China and Russia will be winners.

Let us not forget what everyone has been saying since day 1 – that only the Iranians can overthrow the government and that will only be done if the regular army decides to throw itself to the side of the people. The United States and Israel can only create the necessary (but not sufficient) conditions for this to happen. Without regime change, but with the opening and complete control of the Straits, the destruction of the regime’s naval, air defense, missile and drone forces and production, along with the elimination of senior Basaj and IRGC commanders, will still constitute a satisfactory military victory.

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

Iran Pt One 20260316

Iran: What Victory Looks Like, Part 1 – The Economy

Ridding the World of the Islamic Republic Price Premium

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 16th of March via The Angry Demagogue.

There has been much chatter about what “victory” over the Islamic Republic means and it is mostly an attempt to deny the very concept of victory. We wrote about “The End of Defeatism and a Return to Victory” last week where we criticized the whole aversion to victory in Western society. The naysayers don’t like to admit that an anti-Western regime can be all that bad, and therefore endless diplomacy needs to be a goal until the final surrender of the West. They don’t really care about the cost of gasoline in the United States – they actually want it to rise – but as long as it was brought up, let us examine in part, the cost of the Islamic regime and what “economic victory” will look like.

Victory in WWII meant not only the defeat of the evil that was Nazi Germany, but it also meant the resurgence of Europe as an economically successful continent. The Marshall Plan that was the crux of the European revival was as much a part of the Allied (sans the Soviets) victory as the surrender signed by German generals.

What is “economic victory” in this war? The media is all over the costs of the war, but no one has examined the costs of allowing the Islamic Republic to continue as it is. No one has examined the cost that the mere existence of the Islamic Republic (as opposed to non-Islamic Iran) creates for the world in general and the United States in particular.

Let’s start first with the most talked about and panic-ridden event and that is the Strait of Hormuz, the gateway to the Persian Gulf and a chokepoint in international shipping to and from that region. It is the gateway to much of the oil shipped to the world, but also fertilizers and other products. The Wall Street Journal news section in another ignorant headline it considered a “scoop”, wrote that President Trump was told that the Straits might be closed in case of war and he attacked anyway. I am not sure there is a knowledgeable military or diplomatic figure or layman in the world who didn’t consider that an option, but to the WSJ news editors it was the surprise of the century.

As Condoleezza Rice said on the recent episode of Hoover Institutions “Goodfellows” a 50 cent rise in gasoline prices for a few weeks is not a reason not to attack a country who has been at war with you for 47 years. But before we even get to that point, has anyone analyzed the cost of giving Iran a veto over who gets to ship through those straits?

If we look at the insurance rates for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz from Lloyds of London we will get a first hint. From 1970-1979 (before the Islamic Republic) the typical premium was 0.01-0.05%. Once Khomeini took power the rates were 0.05-0.2%. During the Iran-Iraq war when there were the “tanker wars” (between 1984-7) those rates jumped to around 5% with a peak of 7.5%. The post Iran-Iraq and Gulf war period of 2004-19 ranged from .0.05-0.25% – well above the pre-Islamic Republic days.

As for absolute figures, a tanker valued at $200m with a rate of 0.01% (pre-Islamic Republic) cost $20,000 and .05% will cost $100,000. The cost at 0.5% is $1million. So, the pre-Islamic republic rate for a $200m tanker ranged from $20,000-$100,000 while the absolute rate at the lowest level since the Islamic Republic came into existence ranged from $100,000-$400,000 – during the best of times. This does not take into consideration the war premium for the many years Iran threatened and even hit tankers even without the excuse of American or Israeli bombing. The average “war premium” from 1979-2020 was 0.83% or $1.66 million for a $200 million vessel.

We don’t have the wherewithal to continue this analysis, but this is exactly the type of article that we used to expect from the pre-ideological WSJ (or even NY Times) news sections. Maybe some economist or even the WSJ editorial page can start to do the heavy lifting and tell us how much the Islamic Republic of Iran has added to the gasoline bill of the average American even during non-war periods.

In economic terms – victory means a eliminating the price premium for shipping energy and global trade in general brought on by the very existence of the Islamic Republic. We will know victory is here when there is a return to the insurance premiums of the pre-Islamic Republic days and when the price of oil, due to increased supply from a non-terrorist Iran reaches the levels it is capable of. A 50 cent or even a 1 dollar rise in gas prices for a month will be followed by $2-3 decreases permanently. We won’t reach the 28 cents a gallon I remember from my childhood (actually 27.9 cents), but neither will it be $4.00 (except maybe in California).

This economic victory will reverberate to other theatres. While the Russians might profit from a temporary rise in oil to $100 a barrel, in the medium and long term, if oil drops to $40 a barrel or even less, they will struggle to support the war effort.

The short term costs and dire predictions that the journalists and diplomats have foisted upon us will end up being a drop in the bucket after economic victory is achieved.

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/ 

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share