Geopolitics still hot? Earnings slowing down? Where's the next move? We're going live with @GoRogueTrading to answer that and more. 🗓️ May 7 at 10AM UTC 🔔 Set your reminder

Here we go again with bad geopolitics headlines. Yes, the US “ideological loyalty test” below is impolitic, impolite, and will ruffle feathers to put it mildly. I’m not advocating for it here. As Bloomberg puts it, “Linking America’s long-standing security commitments to such fealty would upend the post-World War II transatlantic relationship, which was built on US military guarantees that superseded many political disagreements.” Yes - and no. NATO is not a book club, student union, or gym: its preamble in 1949 states it is “determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage, and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.” Would NATO use that language again if recreated today? It was also specifically created as an *ideological alliance*, which its own website states was to: 1) “Deter Soviet expansionism” - i.e., anti-communism. You couldn’t join NATO and lean Soviet or trade much with them. (But, yes, France and Italy had strong communist parties that their security services and the U.S. kept eyes on; and Europe tried for USSR trade regularly despite US naysaying.) 2) “Forbid the revival of nationalist militarism”- i.e., anti-Nazi. 3) “Encourage European political integration” - i.e., again ideological. One can argue that NATO now needs to find a new ideology for itself at a time when the West is widely seen to be threatened far more broadly than by Russia. We’ve seen vociferous disagreements in the past over other wars/actions, such as Vietnam and Iraq, but they were at a time that both U.S. and Western hegemony looked unrivalled: do they today? Clearly, the U.S. can’t carry the same burden as before alone - yet its allies are making it abundantly clear that if they get the muscles to act independently, that’s what they want to then do. How does that build trust any more than what the U.S. is doing? Those new muscles will also require the whole *West* to integrate to scale up vs a Chinese giant with a Leninist neomercantilist model that crushes industrial opposition. (That’s now an emerging Establishment view, years late to the party.) Isn’t the U.S. then perhaps pushing for Europe (and Canada) to: - look at threats *globally* while acting locally; - forbid the return of “international pacifism” or defence “Build Back Better”; and - integrate with it (on its terms)? That doesn’t mean this U.S. approach is nice; or easy to swallow for the others; or that it will achieve its goals. You can make the argument it is nasty, and people will choke on it, and so it will do the exact opposite to what the White House wants. Even so, distorting the past to mis-explain the present to avoid a future some don’t want is also not nice, hard to swallow, and unlikely to achieve any security goals in the long run.

Top #cybersecurity# news this month: - Geopolitics and cybersecurity collide over the latest #AI# model - Governments rush to close AI 'patch window' - Cyber attack on Romanian hospitals a test case for disaster planning Read more.

Tonight marks a pivotal moment for geopolitics, markets, and the world. I will be joining Laura Coates on CNN at 11:30 PM ET tonight to provide @KobeissiLetter's analysis on the current situation. Amid the volatility, I will be giving an update on what our economic models suggest and an objective view on what we see coming next. Tune in LIVE on CNN at 11:30 PM ET!

Lazard Asset Management CIO Eric Van Nostrand says recent volatility in geopolitics, oil prices and higher rates reinforces Lazard’s view that markets are shifting into a new supply-side era

What do #AI#, geopolitics, digital assets and tokenization tell us about markets in 2026? On the latest episode of The Bid #podcast#, host Oscar Pulido and Bid producer Stevie Manns revisit some of the biggest conversations of the year so far and explore how these seemingly separate themes connect. From the infrastructure powering AI to shifting assumptions around diversification, they look at the forces changing markets and what they could mean for investors. Listen:

What do #AI#, geopolitics, digital assets and tokenization tell us about markets in 2026? On the latest episode of The Bid #podcast#, host Oscar Pulido and producer Stevie Manns revisit some of the biggest conversations of the year so far and explore how these seemingly separate themes connect. From the infrastructure powering AI to shifting assumptions around diversification, they look at the forces changing markets and what they could mean for investors. Listen:

AI access is becoming the new blunt instrument in geopolitics. @levie on what happens if model access becomes a lever: "A year ago, I wouldn’t have put blocking access to an AI model on the board of possible moves. Now it is.”