Excellent piece. Your ability to explain the bigger picture, overlooked elsewhere, is much appreciated. Looking forward to your coverage of these epic events.
Great piece! I think you're right: it's eventually all about China ... but in the meantime, to eliminate Iran as a threat and enemy in order to achieve an anti-Islamist, enforced peace is paramount. What a relief! Let's hope ...
China does not benefit from instability in Iran or the Persian Gulf, as it relies on stable energy markets. Russia is China’s main oil and gas supplier, while Iranian oil—though discounted—is far more important to Iran than to China. The Iranian protests were largely driven by economic grievances rather than a unified regime-change movement, and claims of 30,000 deaths remain unverified, with actual casualties likely far lower. All countries involved — Iran, China, Russia, and the United States — rely heavily on technology to monitor, influence, and control populations, especially during unrest. From Iran’s perspective, efforts to jam or counter foreign communications systems such as Starlink, including technological support from China, are acts of national self-defense. Tehran frames both its internal security measures and regional posture
as defensive responses to external pressure from the United States and Israel
A really interesting and novel take. Am I right to summarise part of your argument as: ‘US should apply max pressure to resolve Iran NOW, so that it can finally commit to Indo Pacific tilt and solely focus on deterrence and contingency planning against China - especially so if it comes to it, it only has to fight on one front’? If so, doesn’t this assume that the Middle East can be ‘resolved’ and regime change wont spawn 100 other issues? Also, how do you account for the fact that in so much of the rest of the world the US is allowing china’s influence to go unchecked. Especially S America and Sub Saharan Africa? Iran is critical as you rightly outlined, but there are much cheaper (politically, financially, militarily) means of countering China’s influence around the world - which crucially don’t involve the immense expense and risk of bombing campaigns. Interested to hear thoughts and apologies if I’ve mischaracterised
What it comes down to is whether the Gulf States are both sufficiently enraged by Iran’s current scatter gun missile attacks on their territories, and also sufficiently immune from China’s influence - as the author has suggested, to respond militarily now, and police Iran after the conflict.
As Iran has been a constant threat to stability in the Middle East, these States might want take the opportunity of following America’s lead in neutering this threat while the opportunity presents itself.
Opening act was Venezuela. But agree with the rest. America is clearing the board of strategic distractions ahead of 2027. Whether that is regime change or turning said distraction into a US client. I wouldn't want to be in Cuban leadership's position right now.
Zineb is right to widen the aperture beyond Iran. But she still frames the problem as if destroying a Chinese ‘asset’ in Tehran restores American leverage. That assumes the decisive variable is positional. It is not. It is industrial.
The question is not who holds ground in the Gulf. It is who controls replenishment.
In Thucydides Trapped, I argued that Allison’s collision model (Allison 2017) and Mearsheimer’s offensive realism (Mearsheimer 2001) misread the era because they assume war remains a contest of force ratios and resolve. Operation Epic Fury proves the opposite. The United States can strike. It can project. It can destroy. What it cannot do, at scale and speed, is reconstitute.
China controls 60–70 per cent of rare earth mining, over 90 per cent of processing and roughly 94 per cent of high-performance neodymium magnet production. Those magnets sit inside missile seekers, aircraft actuators, radar systems and precision guidance kits. A Tomahawk fired is not simply a symbol of resolve; it is a depletion event. An interceptor launched in the Red Sea is not just deterrence; it is an entry in an industrial ledger.
If Washington escalates in Iran, munitions stocks shrink. If it settles and sanctions lift, Chinese first-mover infrastructure and energy contracts remain. Either path leaves Beijing entrenched in the production structure that Susan Strange identified as the core of structural power (Strange 1988).
Deterrence, in this environment, is no longer about threatening annihilation. It is about convincing the adversary that you can reload. After Iran, that credibility is thinner than rhetoric suggests.
The rising power does not need to collide. It needs to outlast.
A closure of the Strait of Hormuz would primarily affect crude oil flows used for transport fuels and petrochemicals. Oil accounts for roughly 0 to 1 percent of China’s electricity generation. By contrast, coal provides about 55 to 60 percent, hydropower 13 to 15 percent, wind 13 to 14 percent, solar 11 to 12 percent, and nuclear around 4 to 5 percent. Rare earth mining and processing draw on this domestically supplied electricity mix.
So the sharper question is not whether China would have electricity. It is how Beijing would prioritise allocation under stress. Given central control over grid dispatch and industrial planning, strategic sectors such as rare earth processing would likely move up the queue rather than down it.
In that scenario, American access to rare earth elements would hinge less on Chinese energy constraints and more on Chinese export licensing decisions.
Interesting article. I agree with the strategic chess. I disagree with the conclusion that Trump is the one to appreciate the necessity. Attacking Iran to unhinged China's Middle East strategy is high risk. For one, Iran itself isn't a pushover. For another Trump hasn't demonstrated any strategic savvy to date. This gambit may be coming out of of the Joint Staff, previous administration's planners, with a dash of guidance from Israel and perhaps some Arab capitals. If it originates in the Joint Staff and planners who worked in previous administration's, they are people subject to to being sacked on whims of Gabbard, Rubio, Hegseth or Loomer. Who then would be competent to see it through. Also, China are not stumps. What is to stop them, having perceived a US goal of weakening China's ability to neuter a US Response to a Taiwan attack, from acting preemptively while we are engage in Iran. Lastly, isn't the easiest course for China to offer Trump a "special prize" and some favorable terms in a future naming deal and some copyrights on an Ivanka shoe deal, or crypto deal for Trump fits? And what leverage is China building g with their new found friendship with Canada?
Oh yeah cause the Chinese military is just ready to go right now. I mean it's not like they just carried out a Stalin like purge of officers from the top of joint command all the way down to junior officers. That's the kind of army you just know will have no issues starting a major conflict operation in a 48 hour timeline. Oh yeah they'll do great. Hopefully they are stupid enough to do it, wouldn't even need usa involvement the Japanese, Korean and aussies should be enough
Your handle reminds me of the old axiom. There are folks who learn by reading and observing, folks who learn by doing, and folks who learn by peeing on an electric fence.
I read your first book “Yellow River” with great interest. It reminded me of the earlier book “Fifty Yards to the Outhouse” by Willy Makit and Betty Wont.
Canada has now instantly. changed its position. The present Canadian PM Carney is not the same degree of idiot as former PM Trudeau. With regard to rare earth minerals, British material engineers have just now invented a new form of aluminum which will replace these at about 1:1,000 of the cost. The stranglehold of China is about to end.
This gives Trump and his idiots the benefit of the doubt. While the China MAY be true it would be purely coincidental, this is about Trumps profiteering, need to show his manliness, and distraction, all done without coalition building and proper war planning. It’s articles like these which normalize Trump into a rationale actor he is not. Your article while enlightened further muddies the water when you omit his irresponsible impulsive behavior like gutting USAID, firing top military officials on personal grounds, etc. Thanks for laundering and sane washing MAGA.
You’re calling this “derangement,” but what you’re actually doing is giving Trump the benefit of the doubt he’s never earned, pretending he’s playing 3D chess and somehow doing it for the country’s benefit….THAT is derangement or TDS.
His record doesn’t support that fantasy. It shows impulsiveness, self-interest, and a willingness to undermine alliances and democratic norms—see Ukraine, Russia, and the 2020 election. That’s not strategy. That’s a pattern.
And yes, part of that pattern includes deeply questionable associations—like his long-documented pedophile connection to Epstein. That alone should make people pause before treating him as some uniquely principled actor.
What you’re doing is projection. You call critics “deranged,” while treating loyalty as rational. It’s the same playbook Trump uses—throw out accusations like “cheater” or “pedophile” or worse instead of dealing with substance.
And your cancer example actually proves my point. If he cured cancer, yes I’d hate him because he no doubt would withhold from blue states and sell it to the highest bidder. Thinking he’d be benevolent for the sake of mankind and not exploit it for his own insecure power profit and vanity? THAT IS TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME.
Not really. Tump has never made sense. So a lot of people tell me. Just the other day a person came up to me and said" Sir, Trump is an idiot. The biggest in the history of the world. " Seriously if you can find one trace of human dignity in the man, you are amazing. Even God vomits when talks. Or so a lot of people are saying.
A really bad case of trump derangement syndrome in action. He could cure all cancers and you'd still be making this same inane comment whose only evidence consists of your own deluded belief in your ability to mind read.
Please don't confuse Trump's domestic policies (with which many I disagree) and his foreign policies which may seem confusing and my be even to him. Nevertheless, they are right
Oh please Trump has no coherent policy, foreign or domestic. It’s all me me greed greed using our country’s 250 years worth of resources for his own vanity and grievances. This war is an impulsive obscene illegal act to distract from Trump being a pedophile and extract tribute from his Arab and Jewish state cronies. Don’t sanewash him on this site. Trump is abhorrent pedophile who needs to be destroyed Qdaffi style.
Very illuminating, but I very much doubt that Trump himself understands any of this in the slightest. The man is demonstrably ignorant of geopolitics and any strategy, he is just a salesman and the front man for others. Who though? Not his clown car of a cabinet. Rubio? One assumes the remaining professionals in State and the intelligence agencies and DOD made this happen, or encouraged Trump as he sought a distraction from Epstein and his other domestic scandals.
Classic idiotic orange man bad take. The guy is much smarter than you sore lowers will ever give him credit because a leftist never ever reconsiders his opinions, never mind changing them! No CNN told you orange man bad your new npc firmware installed successfully
Excellent piece. Thank you very much. China has remained the top beneficiary of all US sanctions. China has bought cheap and discounted oil from Venezuela, Russia and Iran and currently lives on 1/5 billion barrels of oil in stock, the highest in history. Iran is under bombs and no voice form Beijing.
Zeinub Ribua offers a pragmatic analysis of the U.S. & Israeli war against Iran. She argues that the U.S. is waging this war as a part of their bigger geopolitical reset for the strangulation of China. If her argument is valid, an immediate implication is that the war will risk being prolonged and engulfing the entire Middle East into a chaos. The early development that Ayatollah Khameini and senior Iranian officials are assassinated and that Trump wants a regime change in Iran was met by Iranian response targeting the U.S. and Israeli military targets across the Middle East. Whereas the U.S. and Israel will seek a quick cinematic victory, the Islamic Republic & its allies would seek a protracted war of attrition bleeding the U.S. and Israeli forces. Time will say if the U.S. can close this war as planned.
Interesting, well considered, I wouldn't get into a debate on the thesis...excellent for Friday afternoon faculty cocktail party conversation ...but it's a tad too tidy, as if all loose ends are wrapped up, we can now wash our hands of the situation, and single laser focus can be applied to global considerations that are the antithesis of tidy.
America has never had a coherent China policy, in fact, incoherency for the last century describes it well, and I've seen no evidence that there is a coherent policy anywhere in the future. I'm sure somewhere in the American machinery some smart people were working this into the equation, but as a catch all explanation for what are extremely complicated issues with no apparent or clear outcomes, claiming something is "all about" a specific and particular concern seems simplistically premature.
Excellent piece. Your ability to explain the bigger picture, overlooked elsewhere, is much appreciated. Looking forward to your coverage of these epic events.
Great piece! I think you're right: it's eventually all about China ... but in the meantime, to eliminate Iran as a threat and enemy in order to achieve an anti-Islamist, enforced peace is paramount. What a relief! Let's hope ...
China does not benefit from instability in Iran or the Persian Gulf, as it relies on stable energy markets. Russia is China’s main oil and gas supplier, while Iranian oil—though discounted—is far more important to Iran than to China. The Iranian protests were largely driven by economic grievances rather than a unified regime-change movement, and claims of 30,000 deaths remain unverified, with actual casualties likely far lower. All countries involved — Iran, China, Russia, and the United States — rely heavily on technology to monitor, influence, and control populations, especially during unrest. From Iran’s perspective, efforts to jam or counter foreign communications systems such as Starlink, including technological support from China, are acts of national self-defense. Tehran frames both its internal security measures and regional posture
as defensive responses to external pressure from the United States and Israel
Very insightful. Thank you
This is not going to end well……
A really interesting and novel take. Am I right to summarise part of your argument as: ‘US should apply max pressure to resolve Iran NOW, so that it can finally commit to Indo Pacific tilt and solely focus on deterrence and contingency planning against China - especially so if it comes to it, it only has to fight on one front’? If so, doesn’t this assume that the Middle East can be ‘resolved’ and regime change wont spawn 100 other issues? Also, how do you account for the fact that in so much of the rest of the world the US is allowing china’s influence to go unchecked. Especially S America and Sub Saharan Africa? Iran is critical as you rightly outlined, but there are much cheaper (politically, financially, militarily) means of countering China’s influence around the world - which crucially don’t involve the immense expense and risk of bombing campaigns. Interested to hear thoughts and apologies if I’ve mischaracterised
What it comes down to is whether the Gulf States are both sufficiently enraged by Iran’s current scatter gun missile attacks on their territories, and also sufficiently immune from China’s influence - as the author has suggested, to respond militarily now, and police Iran after the conflict.
As Iran has been a constant threat to stability in the Middle East, these States might want take the opportunity of following America’s lead in neutering this threat while the opportunity presents itself.
Opening act was Venezuela. But agree with the rest. America is clearing the board of strategic distractions ahead of 2027. Whether that is regime change or turning said distraction into a US client. I wouldn't want to be in Cuban leadership's position right now.
I love Cuban cigars, but refusing to go there to avoid providing hard currency to ghastly communist dictatorship (unlike my mates).
Let's hope Cuba transitions to something better soon.
Hopefully peacefully.
Fantastic writing. You are a true strategic thinker. Thanks a lot for the full context here.
Zineb is right to widen the aperture beyond Iran. But she still frames the problem as if destroying a Chinese ‘asset’ in Tehran restores American leverage. That assumes the decisive variable is positional. It is not. It is industrial.
The question is not who holds ground in the Gulf. It is who controls replenishment.
In Thucydides Trapped, I argued that Allison’s collision model (Allison 2017) and Mearsheimer’s offensive realism (Mearsheimer 2001) misread the era because they assume war remains a contest of force ratios and resolve. Operation Epic Fury proves the opposite. The United States can strike. It can project. It can destroy. What it cannot do, at scale and speed, is reconstitute.
China controls 60–70 per cent of rare earth mining, over 90 per cent of processing and roughly 94 per cent of high-performance neodymium magnet production. Those magnets sit inside missile seekers, aircraft actuators, radar systems and precision guidance kits. A Tomahawk fired is not simply a symbol of resolve; it is a depletion event. An interceptor launched in the Red Sea is not just deterrence; it is an entry in an industrial ledger.
If Washington escalates in Iran, munitions stocks shrink. If it settles and sanctions lift, Chinese first-mover infrastructure and energy contracts remain. Either path leaves Beijing entrenched in the production structure that Susan Strange identified as the core of structural power (Strange 1988).
Deterrence, in this environment, is no longer about threatening annihilation. It is about convincing the adversary that you can reload. After Iran, that credibility is thinner than rhetoric suggests.
The rising power does not need to collide. It needs to outlast.
https://alkoch55.substack.com/p/thucydides-trapped?r=kmlt&utm_medium=ios
No rare earth minerals without the energy to mine them.
A closure of the Strait of Hormuz would primarily affect crude oil flows used for transport fuels and petrochemicals. Oil accounts for roughly 0 to 1 percent of China’s electricity generation. By contrast, coal provides about 55 to 60 percent, hydropower 13 to 15 percent, wind 13 to 14 percent, solar 11 to 12 percent, and nuclear around 4 to 5 percent. Rare earth mining and processing draw on this domestically supplied electricity mix.
So the sharper question is not whether China would have electricity. It is how Beijing would prioritise allocation under stress. Given central control over grid dispatch and industrial planning, strategic sectors such as rare earth processing would likely move up the queue rather than down it.
In that scenario, American access to rare earth elements would hinge less on Chinese energy constraints and more on Chinese export licensing decisions.
Great post, I am OK with Allison, Mearsheimer is just one of Lenin useful idiots.
Our so called Western leaders had decades to realise that Russia and China are not friends but enemies and prepare accordingly.
Instead people like Bush and Blair saw God in Putins eyes.
Saintly Obama is responsible for quite a bit of that in Middle East with his idiotic deal with Iran.
Excellent analysis that perfectly explains what Trump is doing in Iran. Congratulations and happy to follow and quote you in future interviews.
Interesting article. I agree with the strategic chess. I disagree with the conclusion that Trump is the one to appreciate the necessity. Attacking Iran to unhinged China's Middle East strategy is high risk. For one, Iran itself isn't a pushover. For another Trump hasn't demonstrated any strategic savvy to date. This gambit may be coming out of of the Joint Staff, previous administration's planners, with a dash of guidance from Israel and perhaps some Arab capitals. If it originates in the Joint Staff and planners who worked in previous administration's, they are people subject to to being sacked on whims of Gabbard, Rubio, Hegseth or Loomer. Who then would be competent to see it through. Also, China are not stumps. What is to stop them, having perceived a US goal of weakening China's ability to neuter a US Response to a Taiwan attack, from acting preemptively while we are engage in Iran. Lastly, isn't the easiest course for China to offer Trump a "special prize" and some favorable terms in a future naming deal and some copyrights on an Ivanka shoe deal, or crypto deal for Trump fits? And what leverage is China building g with their new found friendship with Canada?
Oh yeah cause the Chinese military is just ready to go right now. I mean it's not like they just carried out a Stalin like purge of officers from the top of joint command all the way down to junior officers. That's the kind of army you just know will have no issues starting a major conflict operation in a 48 hour timeline. Oh yeah they'll do great. Hopefully they are stupid enough to do it, wouldn't even need usa involvement the Japanese, Korean and aussies should be enough
Your handle reminds me of the old axiom. There are folks who learn by reading and observing, folks who learn by doing, and folks who learn by peeing on an electric fence.
I read your first book “Yellow River” with great interest. It reminded me of the earlier book “Fifty Yards to the Outhouse” by Willy Makit and Betty Wont.
So you are another one with TDS like my friends in London.
I am sure in your book, Kamala would be much better leader than Trump and Obama deal with Iran was perfect?
What about considering that Trump supported analysis and execution plan of his officials.
That all it matters with leadership in this context.
Who is better leader in your view in the West?
Macron, Starmer, German chancellor?
Maybe new PM of Japan.
Canada is lucky that their neighbour is USA.
With Russia as neighbour they wouldn't exist.
Based on your syntax, I'm going with you being a Rusdian bot with a broke translation app.
Denis you need treatment for TDS, Dude
Canada has now instantly. changed its position. The present Canadian PM Carney is not the same degree of idiot as former PM Trudeau. With regard to rare earth minerals, British material engineers have just now invented a new form of aluminum which will replace these at about 1:1,000 of the cost. The stranglehold of China is about to end.
Brilliant article!🙏
This gives Trump and his idiots the benefit of the doubt. While the China MAY be true it would be purely coincidental, this is about Trumps profiteering, need to show his manliness, and distraction, all done without coalition building and proper war planning. It’s articles like these which normalize Trump into a rationale actor he is not. Your article while enlightened further muddies the water when you omit his irresponsible impulsive behavior like gutting USAID, firing top military officials on personal grounds, etc. Thanks for laundering and sane washing MAGA.
You’re calling this “derangement,” but what you’re actually doing is giving Trump the benefit of the doubt he’s never earned, pretending he’s playing 3D chess and somehow doing it for the country’s benefit….THAT is derangement or TDS.
His record doesn’t support that fantasy. It shows impulsiveness, self-interest, and a willingness to undermine alliances and democratic norms—see Ukraine, Russia, and the 2020 election. That’s not strategy. That’s a pattern.
And yes, part of that pattern includes deeply questionable associations—like his long-documented pedophile connection to Epstein. That alone should make people pause before treating him as some uniquely principled actor.
What you’re doing is projection. You call critics “deranged,” while treating loyalty as rational. It’s the same playbook Trump uses—throw out accusations like “cheater” or “pedophile” or worse instead of dealing with substance.
And your cancer example actually proves my point. If he cured cancer, yes I’d hate him because he no doubt would withhold from blue states and sell it to the highest bidder. Thinking he’d be benevolent for the sake of mankind and not exploit it for his own insecure power profit and vanity? THAT IS TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME.
Go drink some bleach redneck.
You just spent how many words(?) doing exactly what you accuse the scary orange man of doing.
Not really. Tump has never made sense. So a lot of people tell me. Just the other day a person came up to me and said" Sir, Trump is an idiot. The biggest in the history of the world. " Seriously if you can find one trace of human dignity in the man, you are amazing. Even God vomits when talks. Or so a lot of people are saying.
I’m not sure if you’re just clowning around or seriously trying to convince me of ‘something’ but I appreciate the laugh either way. Thank you.
Just having fun in the manner of Trump. Not trying to convince you of anything. I am sure that your views are pretty well set.
Being coherent and rational? When was the last time the pedophile bankrupt incontinent uneducated rapist ever acted that way?
A really bad case of trump derangement syndrome in action. He could cure all cancers and you'd still be making this same inane comment whose only evidence consists of your own deluded belief in your ability to mind read.
Please don't confuse Trump's domestic policies (with which many I disagree) and his foreign policies which may seem confusing and my be even to him. Nevertheless, they are right
Oh please Trump has no coherent policy, foreign or domestic. It’s all me me greed greed using our country’s 250 years worth of resources for his own vanity and grievances. This war is an impulsive obscene illegal act to distract from Trump being a pedophile and extract tribute from his Arab and Jewish state cronies. Don’t sanewash him on this site. Trump is abhorrent pedophile who needs to be destroyed Qdaffi style.
Give your TDS-addled brain a rest.
Go buy some Trump crypto coin MAGAIT
Unlike you, I have self control 🤣
Really? You’re a troll. I see your Substack profile. Go drink some bleach redneck.
Good, then you know i oppose leftists and islamists.
I prefer ivermectine. But you TDS types already know that
Very illuminating, but I very much doubt that Trump himself understands any of this in the slightest. The man is demonstrably ignorant of geopolitics and any strategy, he is just a salesman and the front man for others. Who though? Not his clown car of a cabinet. Rubio? One assumes the remaining professionals in State and the intelligence agencies and DOD made this happen, or encouraged Trump as he sought a distraction from Epstein and his other domestic scandals.
Classic idiotic orange man bad take. The guy is much smarter than you sore lowers will ever give him credit because a leftist never ever reconsiders his opinions, never mind changing them! No CNN told you orange man bad your new npc firmware installed successfully
Great post.
Like other forums there are many posters with TDS.
In their view Biden was mentally fit to run for 2nd term and Kamala had IQ of Nobel Prize winner and made speeches worthy of Winston Churchill.
Still, I hope this attack was not about regime change. Decapitation strategies rarely work.
I guess USA and Israel discovered something which forced them to act now.
brilliant take, U pee
Very informative and insightful piece. Thank you for publishing this!
Excellent piece. Thank you very much. China has remained the top beneficiary of all US sanctions. China has bought cheap and discounted oil from Venezuela, Russia and Iran and currently lives on 1/5 billion barrels of oil in stock, the highest in history. Iran is under bombs and no voice form Beijing.
Zeinub Ribua offers a pragmatic analysis of the U.S. & Israeli war against Iran. She argues that the U.S. is waging this war as a part of their bigger geopolitical reset for the strangulation of China. If her argument is valid, an immediate implication is that the war will risk being prolonged and engulfing the entire Middle East into a chaos. The early development that Ayatollah Khameini and senior Iranian officials are assassinated and that Trump wants a regime change in Iran was met by Iranian response targeting the U.S. and Israeli military targets across the Middle East. Whereas the U.S. and Israel will seek a quick cinematic victory, the Islamic Republic & its allies would seek a protracted war of attrition bleeding the U.S. and Israeli forces. Time will say if the U.S. can close this war as planned.
Interesting, well considered, I wouldn't get into a debate on the thesis...excellent for Friday afternoon faculty cocktail party conversation ...but it's a tad too tidy, as if all loose ends are wrapped up, we can now wash our hands of the situation, and single laser focus can be applied to global considerations that are the antithesis of tidy.
America has never had a coherent China policy, in fact, incoherency for the last century describes it well, and I've seen no evidence that there is a coherent policy anywhere in the future. I'm sure somewhere in the American machinery some smart people were working this into the equation, but as a catch all explanation for what are extremely complicated issues with no apparent or clear outcomes, claiming something is "all about" a specific and particular concern seems simplistically premature.
An incredible article. Thank you.