Latest / Merryn Talks Money / In Greenland with Pippa Malmgren: Why the Arctic Is the New Geopolitical Battleground

Transcript

In Greenland with Pippa Malmgren: Why the Arctic Is the New Geopolitical Battleground · Merryn Talks Money

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
• 0:08
  Speaker 2: If you've been following it, most of this is not
• 0:10
  Speaker 2: a surprise. I've certainly been writing about this for some time,
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: and I think there are a number of people who
• 0:16
  Speaker 2: have But I guess investors they like to do things
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: the way they used to.
• 0:22
  Speaker 3: But my view is the.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: Era of armchair investing has been over for a while.
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: That's partly why I'm in Greenland, because I think you
• 0:31
  Speaker 2: can't afford to look at things from a distance.
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: Welcome to meren Talk's Money, the podcast in which the
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: people who know the markets explain the markets. I'm merin
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: Sumset Web and this week I am speaking with author
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: and CEO of the Geopolitica Institute, Dr Pipper Malngram. Pepper
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: is one of our favorite guests hits Jesu advised prime
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: ministers and presidents, and she's back, i think for the
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: second or third time on this podcast. She is also
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: dialing in from Greenland. We speaking to her on January
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: the twenty first.
• 1:09
  Speaker 4: Pepper. Welcome to Marrin Talks Money.
• 1:11
  Speaker 3: Oh, thank you for having me. It's great to see you.
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: Okay, Now I am excited because you are in Greenland.
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: I am which is astonishing because we have done nothing
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: for the last couple of days except for talk about Greenland.
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: But what we haven't had is a conversation with someone
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: who is itually in Greenland. Now, you have always talked
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: about the future being about hot wars and cold places,
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: and I'm guessing that has something to do with why
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: you are there. Tell me about it.
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: I started writing about why the Arctic was taking a
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: central position in global geopolitics just around twenty twenty one
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: twenty twenty two, and what's amazing is now seeing all
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: the cameras of the world focused on being inside the
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: Arctic circle. The streets here virtually every street.
• 2:02
  Speaker 3: Corner has a journalist on it.
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: But interestingly, I don't get the sense that many people
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: are actually talking to the Greenlanders, which is why I'm here.
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: So I'm speaking to the Inuit senior leaders to try
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: to understand their position, and it's very interesting and it's
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: very different, I think, from what.
• 2:22
  Speaker 3: Most people expect.
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: First of all, we'll get to this, but I don't
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: think you can understand Greenland as an issue by itself.
• 2:31
  Speaker 2: It's in the context of a much, much bigger kind
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: of geopolitical monopoly board. I would call it where the
• 2:39
  Speaker 2: superpowers are moving pieces around and swapping and trading, and
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: so will come to why Greenland has a lot to
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: do with Ukraine and some other issues. But in terms
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: of its own merits, the Innoit are fundamentally of the
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: opinion that they just want independence.
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: From all you guys.
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: And they were on a tract independence with the Kingdom
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: of Denmark when the President of the United States, in
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: their view, kind of rudely interrupted things and has set
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: the independence conversation back worse.
• 3:15
  Speaker 3: Their view is they agree that.
• 3:18
  Speaker 2: The strategic security interests of Greenland obviously lie with the
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: United States. But the culture here and I can feel
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: it when I go around. It's culturally very Danish and
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: very European, and so they don't want to have to
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: make a choice. So there's sort of their messages, We're
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: not for sale, but we're open for a deal. Right,
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: We're not for sale, but we're open for business.
• 3:46
  Speaker 4: Okay.
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: I mean, I suppose that's an important question because you know,
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: when we talk about the independence of Greenland and the
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: Greenlands actually wanting to be an independent country, that's impossible
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: to finance as a standalone business, right, I mean, that
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: would require input from Europe somehow or the US somehow.
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: It's not like you can suddenly declare independence and support
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: yourself right.
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: So again, let's think of it this way. The into
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: It have been here for tens of thousands of years.
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: Their view is the Kingdom of Denmark and the United
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: States are these recent constructs, newcomers that have pitched up
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: on their shores. And one of the Arctic leaders said
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: to me, all these superpowers want to be in the
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: Arctic Circle. But let's see how long they last. In
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: other words, they don't last up here because it's bloody
• 4:34
  Speaker 2: freezing up here. It's hard to live here. And so
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: these Greenlanders are very sophisticated, they're very clever, they're very savvy,
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: and how do we get the best deal out of
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: all these folks that are angling to be here? So
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: then we can maybe come to the bigger picture, which
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: is you know, a lot of commentary is about how
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: this is all about the rare earth metals. I don't
• 4:58
  Speaker 2: actually think that's right. I mean, yes, it has a value,
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: but let's remember that they are rare earth metals all
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: over the place.
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: It's the refining that's the issue.
• 5:08
  Speaker 2: And Greenland is not going to be excited about having
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: the toxic refining process happen here.
• 5:14
  Speaker 3: And yes there are some particularly.
• 5:17
  Speaker 2: Important rare earth here like dysprosium right, things that people
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: never heard of. But that's still, as you say, not
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: enough for a business model.
• 5:27
  Speaker 3: So what are the bigger issues?
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: I say, number one the space race, and we have
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: to remember to do the space race, you need ground
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: station links to satellites. The most effective location for that
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: is the Arctic, which is why small Barge in Norway,
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: the long Burian ground station has such a high importance,
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: and right now it's surrounded by NATO ships guarding because
• 5:55
  Speaker 2: it's so critical. It's like an umbilical cord from data
• 5:59
  Speaker 2: and space two Earth to the subse cable network. But
• 6:04
  Speaker 2: to do all that, there's a heavy emphasis on Arctic
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: ground stations. So one reason you can see why the
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: United States wants at least the north of Greenland is
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: to have the space base there become a ground station,
• 6:22
  Speaker 2: a more important ground station, because right now there's a
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: one single point of failure, which is small Bard.
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: There is a space station, a US space station, ground
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: station on Greenland already.
• 6:33
  Speaker 2: Right it's not it's a military base, it's not aimed
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: at data links the way that Smallbard is right, but
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: it can a different thing. Yeah, And in the old days,
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: space stations were about launching stuff. In the new world,
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: you don't need to launch anything. I mean, there's some
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: launching that will happen, but a whole lot of construction
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: will happen in space now with self assembling, self replicating
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: three D printers, So you don't have to go through
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: the whole rocket business in the same way that we used.
• 7:06
  Speaker 3: To assume we had to.
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: Okay, but I think there's something bigger still, which is
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: what is happening in Ukraine. So and again these are
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: like facets of a very complex puzzle. But so Trump's
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: view is he is trying to cut a piece deal
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: with Russia and negotiating it with China to bring the
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: hostilities in Ukraine to an end. His feeling is the
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: main opposition to getting to that deal are the Europeans,
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: and the Europeans don't have the means to take on Russia,
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: and they will have to because this will metastasize beyond
• 7:51
  Speaker 2: Ukraine if they persist in having the fight. Russia's made
• 7:55
  Speaker 2: that clear. So the President Trumps said very clearly, Okay,
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: the United States is out. We don't want to be
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: in that broader fight. If you guys want to have
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: that fight, you can buy American weapons, but you know,
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: we're not part of that. However, if you're going to
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: do that, then Greenland becomes critical because where would Russian
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: nuclear capabilities show up. They would have to come through
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: the Greenland Iceland UK gap what's called the Juke Gap,
• 8:23
  Speaker 2: which everybody's forgotten about now, but that was a huge
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: deal during the Cold War, and so owning that space
• 8:32
  Speaker 2: becomes vastly more important if the Europeans insist on continuing
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: with the hostilities in Ukraine. And then I would add controversially,
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: the data links that we currently have at Svalbart. Svalbart
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: is technically Norway, but it's controlled by an agreement, the
• 8:56
  Speaker 2: Smalbart Treaty, which dates from around the time of the
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: Treaty of Versailles. So more than forty countries have a
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: right to be in Svalbart, including Russia, which is only
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: four hundred done miles away. So is there a chance
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: that Norway would start to retake control of those data
• 9:18
  Speaker 2: links to the disadvantage of the United States. Yes, we're
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: starting to see press reports to that effect. Therefore, would
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: the United States need to build its own independent data
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: links to space? Yes, and where would you want to
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: do that? Also inside the Arctic Circle. And remember the
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: US only has only one position in the Arctic Circle,
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: which is in Alaska, which is too far away to
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: track what comes through the Giuke Gap. So this is why,
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: and I'm going to emphasize there are rumors, and it's
• 9:50
  Speaker 2: strictly rumors, but there's rumors that one possible deal is
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: that Greenland is actually in a sense split in half
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: or partitioned in some way that allows the US to
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: have a kind of total effective control without needing to
• 10:08
  Speaker 2: consult anyone in the north, and the Kingdom of Denmark
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: to remain in the south. Now, of course, I'm not
• 10:14
  Speaker 2: saying it's a done deal. I'm not even saying it's
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: a negotiating point. I'm just saying, word is that's part
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: of the conversation.
• 10:22
  Speaker 4: Okay, Pippa.
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: A lot of people, when they look at what's happening
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: in Greenland at the moment, or they look at Trump's
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: comments on it, they say the US already has the ability,
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: based on the various treaties that are in existence at
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: the moment to do whatever they want in Greenland, there's
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: no problem from a strategic security perspective, So why does
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: the US need to own it rather than just continue
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: to operate under those treaties.
• 10:44
  Speaker 3: This is exactly my point.
• 10:46
  Speaker 2: The one thing that I can think of that makes
• 10:49
  Speaker 2: sense is if the Norwegians are going to exercise firmer
• 10:54
  Speaker 2: control over the fall barred ground station and data links,
• 10:59
  Speaker 2: then the US would have to build its own. And
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: to build its own, you don't want to be in
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: a situation where you're sharing sovereignty with another European nation
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: that could do the same again. You want to have
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: your own independent control over data links to space. And remember,
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: the Pentagon is crystal clear that space is the most
• 11:20
  Speaker 2: important warfighting domain. So this is the highest priority of
• 11:24
  Speaker 2: the United States is to have real control over space
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: as a war fighting domain. And that is why having
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: a place you control becomes a priority. Now nobody is
• 11:39
  Speaker 2: spelling this out. I am explaining it because I happen
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: to know a lot about the nature of space as
• 11:46
  Speaker 2: a priority from a Pentagon perspective, and the data links
• 11:50
  Speaker 2: being so limited to one location, and if you google
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: it you will start to see press reports that the
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: Norwegians are beginning to take greater control of that data link.
• 12:01
  Speaker 2: And personally, I think this may be the explanation behind
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: that strange letter or note that President Trump sent to
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: sent regarding the Norwegians. Yes, you could read between the
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: lines and say, it's not actually about the Nobel Prize.
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: What it's about is them exercising greater constraints over this
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: fall Bard data link.
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: Okay, so a load of this is really about the
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: US believing that all of its allies are unreliable.
• 12:34
  Speaker 2: Well, yeah, what's really fascinating is let me just quote
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: real quick from Mark Carney's speech from yesterday.
• 12:42
  Speaker 3: It was really fascinating.
• 12:43
  Speaker 2: He said, you cannot live within the lie of mutual
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.
• 12:54
  Speaker 2: Trump would say, exactly, that's exactly right. And the US
• 12:58
  Speaker 2: had been subject to a subordination through the international rules
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: based system that was no longer working to the advantage
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: of the American public, and that is why he is
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: stepping away from that rules based system. From Mark Kearney,
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: who represents the opposite view that the rules based system
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: was the solution, although even he said yesterday that it
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: was a fiction, a useful fiction either way. The bottom
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: line is, the US position under this president is that
• 13:34
  Speaker 2: the existing rule system has absolutely been working opposite to
• 13:39
  Speaker 2: the interests of America's economy America citizens.
• 13:44
  Speaker 4: Can I just go back briefly.
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: There's so many things I want to pick up, but
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: I want to go back very briefly to a piece
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: in the Ukraine and Trump's idea that the only people
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: who don't want it are the Europeans.
• 13:54
  Speaker 4: Will you just break that down for us a bit, right?
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, I think if you've been tracking it,
• 14:00
  Speaker 2: you can see that there was progress being made both
• 14:04
  Speaker 2: with China and Russia coming to some kind of agreement
• 14:10
  Speaker 2: that certain parts of Ukraine were fundamentally Russian and could
• 14:16
  Speaker 2: be returned or in some kind of Russian oversight situation
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: versus the rest of Ukraine that isn't and doesn't want
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: to be part of Russia. So back to this concept
• 14:30
  Speaker 2: of a partition, of a drawing a line of a
• 14:33
  Speaker 2: kind of a North South Korea kind of discussion. The
• 14:37
  Speaker 2: Europeans across the board have been completely opposed, and I mean,
• 14:42
  Speaker 2: there's so many comments, it's not hard to track this
• 14:45
  Speaker 2: and the White House has been like, why do you
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: guys want to keep this going? Well, I must say
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: my own theory is that it's not on its own merits.
• 14:58
  Speaker 2: It's the fundamental problem for the Europeans is if there's
• 15:02
  Speaker 2: a peace deal in Ukraine, they are very unlikely to
• 15:06
  Speaker 2: get paid back what Ukraine owes them. And not only that,
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: but the confiscation of the Russian assets by European nations.
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: They thought they'd never have to pay that back, but
• 15:19
  Speaker 2: if there's a peace deal, they will have to pay
• 15:21
  Speaker 2: it back, which is why there's been a kerfuffle and
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: Brussels over the handling of those Russian sanctioned assets. And
• 15:31
  Speaker 2: so a question is do Europeans think that the whole
• 15:36
  Speaker 2: that would be created by a peace deal is so
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: significant that they can't afford a peace deal? Is that
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: a possibility? And I think more and more Washington thinks
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: that's what's driving this, especially since the Europeans don't have
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: the finances, are the means, although they are saying they do,
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: but kind of everybody goes they don't really have the
• 15:58
  Speaker 2: finances and the means to really properly handle what Russia
• 16:02
  Speaker 2: would represent as a threat.
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: No, okay, And another part of this. Presumably what's going
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: on here is the US wanting to make sure that
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: Europe really really does push up defense spending and develop
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: the capability to defend themselves without having to rely on
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: the US constantly, And so maybe a lot of the
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: conversation around Greenland, etc.
• 16:25
  Speaker 4: Is connected to that too.
• 16:27
  Speaker 2: I would agree completely. It's certainly it's a leverage to
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: compel and it's I would say, Trump will view it
• 16:37
  Speaker 2: as even more than a crowbar. He will also view
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: this as a way of getting it into the headlines
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: all over Europe that the leadership of Europe would prefer
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: to ramp up the conflict with the Russians then to
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: calm it down, because then the public become involved.
• 16:57
  Speaker 4: So what does this what does this all mean?
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: What does it mean for market for investors for the future.
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: When I look at it, I think, well, okay, I'm
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: going to be wanting some gold, I'm going to be
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: wanting some more defense stocks, and I'm going to start
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: thinking there might be a commodity supercycle ahead if everyone's
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: want step you know, bring back the sovereignty, rebuild that
• 17:16
  Speaker 1: domestic industries, rebuild that defense industries, all this type of
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: thing that seems where it's going to go.
• 17:23
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: So I'm going to say this very carefully. I think
• 17:29
  Speaker 2: what we have to consider now is the possibility that
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: Mark Kearney is right that we're dealing with a rupture
• 17:37
  Speaker 2: within NATO. This is not a transition, it's a rupture.
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: And so this will become a big issue for the
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: financial markets. And you know me, I am normally an optimist.
• 17:49
  Speaker 2: I always see this overlining. But this is something that
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: the markets have not anticipated. And let me go further.
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: Already Britain Canada are saying we're going with the Chinese. Right.
• 18:04
  Speaker 2: Canada has already said we are open for business. A
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: year ago, Mark Carney said China was the problem. Today
• 18:09
  Speaker 2: he says China is the answer. In Britain already a
• 18:14
  Speaker 2: closer alliance with the Chinese, and it's demonstratable in so
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: many different ways, including the new embassy embassy.
• 18:22
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: So then the US is going to be like, right,
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: you're not only not my ally, you are aligning with
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: our let's say, not opponent, because the US has been
• 18:32
  Speaker 2: downgrading China as an opponent, but nonetheless uh an entity
• 18:39
  Speaker 2: the US has strategic security issues with.
• 18:42
  Speaker 3: So this is a.
• 18:43
  Speaker 2: Transformation of the geopolitical landscape that markets have not priced in,
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: they have not thought about on.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: The subject of China, Can I just shift of conversations slightly,
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: because it seems to me that one of the most
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: important numbers that have come out this weekend. There's a
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: lot of important stuff going on this week. There's devils,
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: there's Greenland, there's you know, what's going on in the
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: Japanese bond market, etc. But there's also been a number
• 19:06
  Speaker 1: under eight million the number of berths in China last year.
• 19:11
  Speaker 4: So the number of births in China.
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: Is absolutely collapsed, I mean, way faster than anyone expected.
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: And the demographic change around the world is faster, more
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: shocking than I think any forecasts expected. It's not really
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: related to our previous conversation, but it still seems to
• 19:30
  Speaker 1: me to be another massive thread in macro conversations.
• 19:35
  Speaker 4: Do you look at that at all?
• 19:37
  Speaker 2: That's related to the larger question of what is the
• 19:40
  Speaker 2: true condition of the Chinese economy right now? And I
• 19:44
  Speaker 2: have argued for some years now that I think it's
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: in worse shape than we acknowledge. And I do think
• 19:52
  Speaker 2: that the Communist Party in China has been more open
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: to having a dialogue and discussion with Trump on the
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: grounds that they're not really in a great place to
• 20:06
  Speaker 2: enter a conflict with the United States. And let's face it,
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: they had a one child policy for so long. Are
• 20:12
  Speaker 2: they really prepared to lose their one child in a conflict.
• 20:16
  Speaker 2: Plus these days, the conflict is they won't be.
• 20:20
  Speaker 3: Like in Ukraine.
• 20:22
  Speaker 2: This will be super high tech and so massively destructive
• 20:26
  Speaker 2: that neither China nor the United States wants to go
• 20:29
  Speaker 2: down that road, which is why they've been talking about
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: what more collaborative things could we do to Basically Trump's
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: message to the Chinese is we have two choices. We
• 20:40
  Speaker 2: can go to war it's going to be ugly, messy, expensive,
• 20:43
  Speaker 2: or let's go back to making money. Can we just
• 20:46
  Speaker 2: figure out how to get these peace deals into place
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: so that we can renormalize both China and Russia in
• 20:53
  Speaker 2: the world economy. And there's a receptivity to that in Beijing,
• 20:59
  Speaker 2: that especially because remember, this is the only president they're
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: ever going to have, probably and they ever have had,
• 21:05
  Speaker 2: that is willing to negotiate over Taiwan, and his position
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: on Taiwan is We're moving all the chip production to
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: Arizona and Texas, so ten years from now, the vulnerability
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: won't be there. And not only that, we think China
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: is not doing so well because it needs to be
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: more like Taiwan. So could we could do a deal
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: if China were to become more like Taiwan, but not
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: if Taiwan has to become more like China. And of
• 21:34
  Speaker 2: course the Chinese are like, it's our own domestic decision,
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: and they're quite right about that. So you can't force this,
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: you can't impose that on them. But what conclusions are
• 21:43
  Speaker 2: they reaching themselves about their economic future is probably that
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: they do need to be more like Taiwan in order
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: to be competitive and viable in a modern world economy.
• 21:56
  Speaker 1: Okay, interesting, they kind of just pick up on something
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: you said that I had no thought about this before.
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: But might it be that falling fertility rates, changing demographics
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: make the odds of a hot ground war in Europe
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: or indeed anywhere else significantly less likely than in the past.
• 22:19
  Speaker 3: Ah.
• 22:19
  Speaker 2: Yes, The only thing for you have to add this proviso,
• 22:23
  Speaker 2: which is Elon gave a speech at West Point, I
• 22:27
  Speaker 2: think it was in February last year where he was asked,
• 22:32
  Speaker 2: what is your advice.
• 22:33
  Speaker 3: About managing.
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: Managing humans on the battlefield, and he said, my advice
• 22:39
  Speaker 2: is to keep humans well away from the battlefield because
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: drones with AI will target your heart and you will
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: be dead before you hear it. So we don't want
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: humans on a battlefield. So what does that mean. That
• 22:53
  Speaker 2: means we're talking robotics automation. Now, if you have robots
• 22:57
  Speaker 2: fighting robots, first of all, how do you win? And
• 23:01
  Speaker 2: the answer is whoever runs out of three D printing
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: material first loses? Well, batteries or batteries right?
• 23:09
  Speaker 3: Or power? Now power?
• 23:11
  Speaker 2: What has happened? The US just did a very interesting
• 23:15
  Speaker 2: foreign policy maneuver in Venezuela where they did not do
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: regime change. They kept the regime while removing the leader,
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: but sent a clear message that Venezuela cannot control its
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: oil sales anymore. The US controls the tap, which has
• 23:35
  Speaker 2: a subliminal message to China, we will protect your right
• 23:39
  Speaker 2: to buy oil from Venezuela, but if you want to
• 23:42
  Speaker 2: go to war with the United States, we'll turn it off.
• 23:46
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: So ken China even opts for a war given that
• 23:51
  Speaker 2: they don't have energy and they don't have food supplies.
• 23:58
  Speaker 2: So again Trump doesn't want I want to humiliate anyone,
• 24:02
  Speaker 2: But if we want to bring China into a better
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: place with a better future, and I think it's true
• 24:08
  Speaker 2: for the United States as well, right, which is going
• 24:11
  Speaker 2: to get us to a better future faster going to
• 24:13
  Speaker 2: a conventional war or finding diplomatic resolutions that let us
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: all go back to doing business and making money again.
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: So it's not specific and it's not aimed at China.
• 24:25
  Speaker 2: It's more a kind of universal principle. And I kind
• 24:29
  Speaker 2: of describe it as their two choices. Star Wars are
• 24:32
  Speaker 2: star Trek. Star Wars is where we go to war
• 24:35
  Speaker 2: with people. Star Trek, which is what everybody sees to
• 24:39
  Speaker 2: be leaning towards, is let's go to war with problems.
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: Let's use supercomputing and AI and all our new capabilities
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: to just keep solving problems so we can grow food
• 24:48
  Speaker 2: better faster, we can find rare earth materials and convert
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: them with less toxic processes, et cetera, et cetera. And honestly,
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: I don't see why the superpowers will opt for Star
• 25:01
  Speaker 2: Wars in this environment.
• 25:04
  Speaker 4: The big risk here is between Europe and Russia.
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: It seems from what you're saying, that's why things might
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: go wrong because the wrong choices will be made.
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but also could we start to see the strange
• 25:19
  Speaker 2: alignment between China and the Europeans and Russia and the
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: United States, Then that's a completely different geopolitical configuration than
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: anybody's really thought through. And notice that again, Trump is
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: trying to build a kind of parallel structure to the
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: United Nations. Right now, there's a huge skepticism about his
• 25:49
  Speaker 2: new Peace board, but basically he's anticipating that this is
• 25:53
  Speaker 2: a real possibility. What's Canada, Britain, France are inviting China
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: to be their partner, which they do seem to be,
• 26:04
  Speaker 2: and at the same time preparing to take on Russia.
• 26:07
  Speaker 2: And let's not forget China is moving into the East
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: of Russia very very quickly now, and Russia had only
• 26:13
  Speaker 2: recently announced that it's dropping the visa requirement for Chinese
• 26:19
  Speaker 2: and Indian nationals because they want the East developed, they
• 26:22
  Speaker 2: want investment, they want the high speed rail, they want
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: the ports. So understanding what's happening seed to the Chinese
• 26:34
  Speaker 2: Russian relationship becomes central to our understanding of the future.
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: Now, one of the other things that you mentioned earlier
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: in the podcast is energy and the Japanese experiments. It
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: shows that it is possible to be managed direct from
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: solar panels in space to Earth. Now, this doesn't solve
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: our problem with the grid, obviously everyone's electricity grids still
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: need to be upgraded. But it certainly solves our problem
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: with intermittent renewable energy, right, and that could bring in
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: and a great age of energy abundant. And if we
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: can stop finding over energy, things get about globally anyway.
• 27:06
  Speaker 2: Well, I agree with that, and I would add to
• 27:08
  Speaker 2: the picture that we seem to be making incredibly fast
• 27:11
  Speaker 2: progress on nuclear fusion. The part of the reason that
• 27:16
  Speaker 2: Trump has appointed Jared Isaacson to be the administrator of
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: NASA is because of his vision that we need to
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: convert NASA from being a scientific research organization into being
• 27:26
  Speaker 2: an operational organization that is aiming at getting to the
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: energy supply on the Moon, which is helium three. Now
• 27:36
  Speaker 2: there's some helium three on Earth, there's quite a bit
• 27:39
  Speaker 2: of Minnesota, for example, and now we can more and
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: more create it in a lab as well. But bottom
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: line is, if you want to do nuclear fusion, you
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: need helium three, and if you want to do quantum computing,
• 27:52
  Speaker 2: you need helium three. So the race to get to
• 27:55
  Speaker 2: the moon and get it is on.
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: But everything that looks chaoche to everybody else we love
• 28:02
  Speaker 1: of other people, to you, looks rational, straightforward.
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: I see an opportunity to turn what appears to be
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: chaos into opportunity, and I think that is what we
• 28:14
  Speaker 2: do in markets. That is the magic trick that good
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: investors engage in, is to get past its chaos, because
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: that means you're stuck in an old mentality. And also
• 28:26
  Speaker 2: it means people have not been following geopolitics very closely.
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: They just didn't think it was important or they didn't
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: know how to discount it. But if you've been following it,
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: most of this is not a surprise. I've certainly been
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: writing about this for some time, and I think there
• 28:41
  Speaker 2: are a number of people who have. But I guess
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: investors they like to do things the way they used to.
• 28:48
  Speaker 2: But my view is the era of armchair investing has
• 28:52
  Speaker 2: been over for a while. And that's partly why I'm
• 28:55
  Speaker 2: in Greenland, because I think you can't afford to look
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: at things from a distance. You have to go and
• 29:02
  Speaker 2: try to understand what is actually happening. It's why I'm
• 29:05
  Speaker 2: involved in tech so that I get a front row
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: seat on what is actually happening in this field. Build
• 29:12
  Speaker 2: networks of people that can inform you. So I think
• 29:16
  Speaker 2: getting more involved even for your retail community of investors
• 29:22
  Speaker 2: who say, well, I can't just hop to Greenlander. Even
• 29:25
  Speaker 2: if I did, I don't know anybody there. Nonetheless, the
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: ability to do deep research now because the Internet is
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: available to us is there. It's just people don't do
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: it because they think, oh, I'll just park my money
• 29:38
  Speaker 2: and the pension and I'm good. But I'm not so
• 29:41
  Speaker 2: sure that works anymore.
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the age of extrapolation is over right, Yeah, yeah, yeah,
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: But you know they don't have to go and do
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: all that because they've got you. They've got you, and
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: they've got the Marin Dogs Money podcast to explain all
• 29:54
  Speaker 1: this stuff, and we are very very grateful. Listen, one
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: last question for you, because I know you you want
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: to get back to Greenland, which is a lot more
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: interesting than looking to me hedging against the risks of
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: everything going horribly wrong.
• 30:06
  Speaker 4: Do you do that with gold? Do you do it
• 30:08
  Speaker 4: with silva? Do you do it with the portfolio of metals?
• 30:10
  Speaker 2: Do you do it with bitcoin? I, first of all,
• 30:13
  Speaker 2: take the view that there isn't one answer that applies
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: to everybody, because it depends A what are you already long?
• 30:21
  Speaker 2: And b what are your actual skills? So I think
• 30:26
  Speaker 2: one question is which do you trust more a committee
• 30:31
  Speaker 2: of people or algorithms. For people who prefer outsourcing decision
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: making to algorithms, they're going to lean into bitcoin, they're
• 30:42
  Speaker 2: going to lean into stable coins. For people who trust
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: committees of people, who they prefer having the FED making
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: decisions about the value of money and interest rates and
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: all that stuff. So that's a fundamental question. Where do
• 30:56
  Speaker 2: you stand on that issue? Another is are you going
• 31:02
  Speaker 2: to just stay in the traditional assets or try to
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: anticipate what's coming. So I've been very interested in stable
• 31:11
  Speaker 2: coins in the United States because I think that Scott Bessened,
• 31:15
  Speaker 2: our Secretary of the Treasury, sees this as a way
• 31:18
  Speaker 2: of widening the pathway for capital to reach new venture founders.
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: In other words, he's saying, we don't need one Elon Musk,
• 31:29
  Speaker 2: we need thousands of them. We need new entrepreneurs to
• 31:34
  Speaker 2: be able to get liquidity and capital so they can
• 31:37
  Speaker 2: build and create whatever it is they're creating. So stable
• 31:42
  Speaker 2: coins are a way of breaking the lock that Wall
• 31:44
  Speaker 2: Street has had on who gets money, and they give
• 31:48
  Speaker 2: money to very few people, and they only give it
• 31:50
  Speaker 2: to unicorn. Scott Bessett's like, well, what about a half unicorn?
• 31:53
  Speaker 2: What about a quarter unicorn? Those are still very important
• 31:56
  Speaker 2: businesses for the economy. So I'm interested in stable coins
• 32:01
  Speaker 2: not because I think that every single one of them
• 32:03
  Speaker 2: will be successful, but because the philosophy behind it tells
• 32:08
  Speaker 2: me the US is finding ways to get more entrepreneurs going,
• 32:14
  Speaker 2: and some of them will fail, but more of them
• 32:16
  Speaker 2: will succeed. So I think these philosophical questions you have
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: to answer first before you get to, yeah, what commodity
• 32:24
  Speaker 2: am I going to buy? Silver is interesting because it's
• 32:27
  Speaker 2: needed for actual industrial operations. In technology, you can't do
• 32:33
  Speaker 2: electric vehicles without silver, for example.
• 32:36
  Speaker 3: So silver has a.
• 32:38
  Speaker 2: Real demand and we can't yet create it in a lab,
• 32:42
  Speaker 2: although I'm betting that we will be able to create
• 32:44
  Speaker 2: silver and gold in a lab.
• 32:46
  Speaker 3: In pretty sure order, given super computing and AI.
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: Right, alchemy, alchemy is starting ready, It's already possible. I mean,
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: I'm told it is already possible to create gold in
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: a lab, but it is so phenomenally expensive that we
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: can't touch it yet, but surprise if gold goes up,
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: you know who knows exactly.
• 33:04
  Speaker 2: Look, we're in a new materials revolution where the new
• 33:07
  Speaker 2: willowship from Google has already allowed the discovery of over
• 33:11
  Speaker 2: three hundred and eighty thousand new materials and.
• 33:14
  Speaker 3: Two million new crystals.
• 33:16
  Speaker 2: So our capacity to create reality atom by atom by
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: adam and build new materials in this way, this is
• 33:24
  Speaker 2: a revolution in the course of human history. It's literally
• 33:27
  Speaker 2: an evolutionary leap. And so is investing going to change
• 33:32
  Speaker 2: because of this? Yes, I come back to that Star
• 33:36
  Speaker 2: trek where you start to be able to create whatever
• 33:39
  Speaker 2: you want just by imagining it, because now you can
• 33:42
  Speaker 2: literally paint reality into being with atoms and electrons.
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, thank you, Thank you so much. That was
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: absolutely fascinating and hugely, hugely valuable. And I think we're
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: all quite envious of you being on the ground in
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: Greenland and thing we're just like and we hope that
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: we will him. We're about to at a later point
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: we will be giving a very close NYE on your
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: Twitter account to see what you're seeing and what you're
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: seeing and what you're saying. One thanks for listening to
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: this week's Maren Talks Money. If you like us, show, rate,
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: review and subscribe wherever you listen to your podcasts and
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: keep sending questions or comments to Merror Money at Bloomberg
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: dot net. You can also follow me and John on
• 34:19
  Speaker 1: Twitter or x I'm at marineess W and John is
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: John Underscore Stepic. This episode was hosted by Me Marren
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: Sunset Web. It was produced by Someasadi and Moses and
• 34:28
  Speaker 1: sound designed by Blake Maples, Aaron Caspers, and Kelly Garry.
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: Special thanks to Dr Piper Malngram.
• 34:35
  Speaker 4: Of course,