Energy

Executive Summary Iran Reaches Nuclear Breakout Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Biden And Putin Court The Middle East The next geopolitical crisis will stem from the Middle East. The US, Russia, and China are striving for greater influence there and Iran’s nuclear quest is reaching a critical juncture. The risk of US-Israeli attacks against Iran remains 40% over the medium term and will rise sharply if Iran attempts to construct a deliverable nuclear device. Saudi Arabia may increase oil production but only if global demand holds up, which OPEC will assess at its August 3 meeting. Global growth risks will prevail in the short term and reduce its urgency. Russia will continue to squeeze supplies of energy and food for the outside world. The restart of Nord Stream 1 and the Turkey-brokered grain export proposal are unreliable signals. Russia’s aim is victory in Ukraine and any leverage will be used. The US may be done with the Middle East but the Middle East may not be done with the US. Structurally we remain bullish on gold and European defense stocks but we are booking 17% and 18% gains on our current trades. The deterioration in global growth and likely pullback in inflation will temporarily undercut these trades. Tactical Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GOLD (CLOSED) 2019-06-12 17.1% LONG EUROPEAN AEROSPACE & DEFENSE / EUROPEAN TECH EQUITIES (CLOSED) 2022-03-18 17.9% Bottom Line: Global demand is weakening, which will weigh on bond yields and commodities. Yet underlying oil supply constraints persist – and US-Iran conflict will exacerbate global stagflation. Feature Chart 1Equity Volatility And Oil Price Volatility Equity Volatility And Oil Price Volatility Equity Volatility And Oil Price Volatility US President Joe Biden visited Saudi Arabia last week in a belated attempt to make amends with OPEC, increase oil production, and reduce inflation ahead of the midterm election. Biden also visited Israel to deter Iran, which is the next geopolitical crisis that markets are underrating. Meanwhile Russian President Vladimir Putin went to Iran on his second trip outside of Russia since this year’s invasion of Ukraine. Putin sought an ally in his conflict with the West, while also negotiating with Turkish President Recep Erdogan, who sought to position himself as a regional power broker. In this report we analyze Biden’s and Putin’s trips and what they mean for the global economy and macro investors. Macroeconomics is bearish for oil in the short term but geopolitics is bullish for oil in the short-to-medium term. The result is volatility (Chart 1). OPEC May Pump More Oil But Not On Biden’s Time Frame Here are the important developments from Biden’s trip: A credible threat against Iran: The US and Israel issued a joint declaration underscoring their red line against Iranian nuclear weaponization.1 Meanwhile the Iranians claimed to have achieved “nuclear breakout,” i.e. enough highly enriched uranium to construct a nuclear device (Chart 2). A balance-of-power coalition to contain Iran: Israel and Saudi Arabia improved relations on the margin. Each took action to build on the strategic détente between Israel and various Arab states that is embodied in the 2020 Abraham Accords.2 This strategic détente has staying power because it is a self-interested attempt by the various nations to protect themselves against common rivals, particularly Iran (Chart 3). Biden also tried to set up a missile defense network with Israel and the Arabs, although it was not finalized.3 Chart 2Iran Reaches Nuclear Breakout Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Biden And Putin Court The Middle East A reaffirmed US-Saudi partnership: The US and Saudi Arabia reaffirmed their partnership despite a rocky patch over the past decade. The rocky patch arises from US energy independence, China’s growth, and US attempts to normalize ties with Iran (Chart 4). These trends caused the Saudis to doubt US support and to view China as a strategic hedge. Chart 3Iran: Surrounded And Outgunned Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Biden And Putin Court The Middle East ​​​​​​ President Biden came into office aiming to redo the Iran deal and halt arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Since then he has been chastened by high energy prices, a low approval rating, and hawkish Iranian policy. On this trip he came cap in hand to the Saudis in a classic example of geopolitical constraints. If the US-Iran deal is verifiably dead, then US-Saudi ties will improve sustainably. (Though of course the Saudis will still do business with China and even start trading with China in the renminbi.) What global investors want to know is whether the Saudis and OPEC will pump more oil. The answer is maybe someday. The Saudis will increase production to save the global business cycle but not the Democrats’ election cycle. They told Biden that they will increase production only if there is sufficient global demand. Global Brent crude prices have fallen by 6% since May, when Biden booked his trip, so the kingdom is not in a great rush to pump more. Its economy is doing well this year (Chart 5). Chart 4Drivers Of Saudi Anxiety Drivers Of Saudi Anxiety Drivers Of Saudi Anxiety ​​​​​ Chart 5Saudis Won't Pump If Demand Is Weak Saudis Won't Pump If Demand Is Weak Saudis Won't Pump If Demand Is Weak ​​​​​​ At the same time, if global demand rebounds, the Saudis will not want global supply constraints to generate punitive prices that cap the rebound or kill the business cycle. After all, a global recession would deplete Saudi coffers, set back the regime’s economic reforms, exacerbate social problems, and potentially stir up political dissent (Chart 6). Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyThird Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning Hence the Saudis will not increase production substantially until they have assessed the global economy and discussed the outlook with the other members of the OPEC cartel in August and September, when the July 2021 agreement to increase production expires. We expect global demand to weaken as Europe and China continue to struggle. Our Commodity & Energy Strategist Bob Ryan argues that further escalation in the energy war between the EU and Russia could push prices above $220 per barrel by Q4 2023, whereas an economic collapse could push Brent down to $60 per barrel. His base case Brent price forecast remains $110 per barrel on average in 2022 and $117 per barrel in 2023 (Chart 7). Chart 6Saudis Will Pump To Prevent Recession Saudis Will Pump To Prevent Recession Saudis Will Pump To Prevent Recession ​​​​​​ Chart 7BCA's July 2022 Oil Price Forecast BCA's July 2022 Oil Price Forecast BCA's July 2022 Oil Price Forecast ​​​​​​ The geopolitical view suggests upside oil risks over the short-to-medium time frame but the macroeconomic view suggests that downside risks will be priced first. Bottom Line: Saudi Arabia may increase production but not at any US president’s beck and call. The Saudis are not focused on US elections, they benefit from the current level of prices, and they do not suffer if Republicans take Congress in November. The downside risk in oil prices stems from demand disappointments in global growth (especially China) rather than any immediate shifts in Saudi production discipline. Volatility will remain high. US-Iran Talks: Dying But Not Dead Yet In fact the Middle East underscores underlying and structural oil supply constraints despite falling global demand. While Iran is a perennial geopolitical risk, the world is reaching a critical juncture over the next couple of years. Investors should not assume that Iran can quietly achieve nuclear arms like North Korea. Since August 2021 we have argued that the US and Iran would fail to put back together the 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPA). This failure would in turn lead to renewed instability across the Middle East and sporadic supply disruptions as the different nations trade military threats and potentially engage in direct warfare. This forecast is on track after Biden’s and Putin’s trip – but we cannot yet say that it is fully confirmed. Biden’s joint declaration with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid closed any daylight that existed between the US and Israel. Given that there was some doubt about the intentions of Biden and the Democrats, it is now crystal clear that the US is determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons even if it requires military action. The US specifically said that it will use “all instruments of national power” to prevent that outcome. Chart 8Iran Not Forced To Capitulate Iran Not Forced To Capitulate Iran Not Forced To Capitulate Judging by the tone of the statement, the Israelis wrote the document and Biden signed it.4 Biden’s foreign policy emphasizes shoring up US alliances and partnerships, which means letting allies and partners set the line. Israel’s Begin Doctrine – which says that Israel is willing to attack unilaterally and preemptively to prevent a hostile neighbor from obtaining nuclear weapons – has been reinforced. The US is making a final effort to intimidate Iran into rejoining the deal. By clearly and unequivocally reiterating its stance on nuclear weapons, and removing doubts about its stance on Israel, there is still a chance that the Iranian calculus could change. This is possible notwithstanding Ayatollah Khamenei’s friendliness with Putin and criticisms of western deception.5 After all, why would the Iranians want to be attacked by the US and Israeli militaries? Iran will need to think very carefully about what it does next. Khamenei just turned 83 years old and is trying to secure the Islamic Republic’s power transition and survival after his death. Here are the risks: Iran’s economy, buoyed by the commodity cycle, is not so weak as to force Khamenei to capitulate. Back in 2015 oil prices had collapsed and his country was diplomatically isolated. Today the economy has somewhat weathered the storm of the US’s maximum pressure sanctions (Chart 8). Iran is in bad shape but it has not been brought to its knees. Another risk is that Khamenei believes the American public lacks the appetite for war. Americans say they are weary of Middle Eastern wars and do not feel particularly threatened by Iran. However, this would be a miscalculation. US war-weariness is nearing the end of its course. The US engages in a major military expedition roughly every decade. Americans are restless and divided – and the political elite fear populism – so a new foreign distraction is not as unlikely as the consensus holds. Moreover a nuclear Iran is not an idle threat but would trigger a regional nuclear arms race and overturn the US grand strategy of maintaining a balance of power in the Middle East (as in other regions). In short, the US government can easily mobilize the people to accept air strikes to prevent Iran from going nuclear because there is latent animosity toward Iran in both political parties (Chart 9). Chart 9Risk: Iran Overrates US War-Weariness Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Another risk is that Iran forges ahead believing that the US and Israel are unwilling or unable to attack and destroy its nuclear program. The western powers might opt for containment like they did with North Korea or they might attack and fail to eliminate the program. This is hard to believe but Iran clearly cannot accept US security guarantees as an alternative to a nuclear deterrent when it seeks regime survival. At the same time Russia is courting Iran, encouraging it to join forces against the American empire. Iran is planning to sell drones to Russia for use in Ukraine, while Russia is maintaining nuclear and defense cooperation with Iran. Putin’s trip highlighted a growing strategic partnership despite a low base of economic ties  (Chart 10).6 Chart 10Russo-Iranian Ties Russo-Iranian Ties Russo-Iranian Ties ​​​​​​ Chart 11West Vulnerable To Middle East War Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Biden And Putin Court The Middle East While Russia does not have an interest in a nuclear-armed Iran, it is not afraid of Iran alone, and it would benefit enormously if the US and Israel got bogged down in a new war that destabilized the Middle East. Oil prices would rise, the US would be distracted, and Europe would be even more vulnerable (Chart 11). Chart 12China's Slowdown And Dependency On Middle East China's Slowdown And Dependency On Middle East China's Slowdown And Dependency On Middle East China’s interest is different. It would prefer for Iran to undermine the West by means of a subtle and long-term game of economic engagement rather than a destabilizing war in the region that would upset China’s already weak economy. However, Beijing will not join with the US against Iran, especially if Iran and Russia are aligned. Ultimately China needs to access Iranian energy reserves via overland routes so that it gains greater supply security vis-à-vis the American navy (Chart 12). Since June 2019, we have maintained 40% odds of a military conflict with Iran. The logic is outlined in Diagram 1, which we have not changed. Conflict can take various forms since the western powers prefer sabotage or cyber-attacks to outright assault. But in the end preventing nuclear weapons may require air strikes – and victory is not at all guaranteed. We are very close to moving to the next branch in Diagram 1, which would imply odds of military conflict rise from 40% to 80%. We are not making that call yet but we are getting nervous. Diagram 1Iran Nuclear Crisis: Decision Tree Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Moreover it is the saber rattling around this process – including an extensive Iranian campaign to deter attack – that will disrupt oil distribution and transport sooner rather than later. Bottom Line: The US and Iran could still find diplomatic accommodation to avoid the next step in our decision tree. Therefore we are keeping the odds of war at a subjective 40%. But we have reached a critical juncture. The next step in the process entails a major increase in the odds of air strikes. Putin’s Supply Squeeze Will Continue As we go to press, financial markets are reacting to President Putin’s marginal easing of Russian political pressure on food and energy supplies. First, Putin took steps toward a deal, proposed by Turkish President Erdogan, to allow Ukrainian grain exports to resume from the Black Sea. Second, Putin allowed a partial restart of the Nord Stream 1 natural gas pipeline, after a total cutoff occurred during the regular, annual maintenance period. However, these moves should be kept into perspective. Nord Stream 1 is still operating at only 40% of capacity. Russia reduced the flow by 60% after the EU agreed to impose a near-total ban on Russian oil exports by the end of the year. Russia is imposing pain on the European economy in pursuit of its strategic objectives and will continue to throttle Europe’s natural gas supply. Russia’s aims are as follows: (1) break up European consensus on Russia and prevent a natural gas embargo from being implemented in future (2) pressure Europe into negotiating a ceasefire in Ukraine that legitimizes Russia’s conquests (3) underscore Russia’s new red line against NATO military deployments in Finland and Sweden. Europe, for its part, will continue to diversify its natural gas sources as rapidly as possible to reduce Russia’s leverage. The European Commission is asking countries to decrease their natural gas consumption by 15% from August to March. This will require rationing regardless of Russia’s supply squeeze. The collapse in trust incentivizes Russia to use its leverage while it still has it and Europe to try to take that leverage away. The economic costs are frontloaded, particularly this winter. The same goes for the Turkish proposal to resume grain exports. Russia will continue to blockade Ukraine until it achieves its military objectives. The blockade will be tightened or loosened as necessary to achieve diplomatic goals. Part of the reason Russia invaded in the first place was to seize control of Ukraine’s coast and hold the country’s ports, trade, and economy hostage. Bottom Line: Russia’s relaxation of food and energy flows is not reliable. Flows will wax and wane depending on the status of strategic negotiations with the West. Europe’s economy will continue to suffer from a Russia-induced supply squeeze until Russia achieves a ceasefire in Ukraine. So will emerging markets that depend on grain imports, such as Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan. Investment Takeaways The critical juncture has arrived for our Iran view. If Iran does not start returning to nuclear compliance soon, then a fateful path of conflict will be embarked upon. The Saudis will not give Biden more oil barrels just yet. But they may end up doing that if global demand holds up and the US reassures them that their regional security needs will be met. First, the path for oil over the next year will depend on the path of global demand. Our view is negative, with Europe heading toward recession, China struggling to stimulate its economy effectively, and the Fed unlikely to achieve a soft landing. Second, the path of conflict with Iran will lead to a higher frequency of oil supply disruptions across the Middle East that will start happening very quickly after the US-Iran talks are pronounced dead. In other words, oil prices will be volatile in a stagflationary environment. In addition, while inflation might roll over for various reasons, it is not likely to occur because of any special large actions by Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are waiting on global cues. Of these, China is the most important. We are booking a 17% gain on our long gold trade as real rates rise and China’s economy deteriorates (Chart 13). This is in line with our Commodity & Energy Strategy, which is also stepping aside on gold for now. Longer term we remain constructive as we see a secular rise in geopolitical risk and persistent inflation problems. Chart 13Book Gains On Gold ... For Now Book Gains On Gold ... For Now Book Gains On Gold ... For Now We are booking an 18% gain on our long European defense / short European tech trade. Falling bond yields will benefit European tech (Chart 14). We remain bullish on European and global defense stocks. Chart 14Book Gains On EU Defense Vs Tech ... For Now Book Gains On EU Defense Vs Tech ... For Now Book Gains On EU Defense Vs Tech ... For Now ​​​​​​ Chart 15Markets Underrate Middle East Geopolitical Risk Biden And Putin Court The Middle East Biden And Putin Court The Middle East ​​​​​ Stay long US equities relative to UAE equities. Middle Eastern geopolitical risk is underrated (Chart 15). Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1      The White House, “The Jerusalem U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Joint Declaration,” July 14, 2022, whitehouse.gov. 2     Israel and the US will remove international peacekeepers from the formerly Egyptian Red Sea islands of Tiran and Sanafir, which clears the way for Saudi Arabia to turn them into tourist destinations. Saudi Arabia also removed its tight airspace restrictions on Israel, enabling civilian Israeli airlines to fly through Saudi airspace on normal basis. Of course, Saudi allowance for Israeli military flights to pass through Saudi airspace would be an important question in any future military operation against Iran. 3     The US has long wanted regional missile defense integration. The Biden administration is proposing “integrated air defense cooperation” that would include Israel as well as the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). A regional “air and missile defense architecture” would counter drones and missiles from rival states and non-state actors such as Iran and its militant proxies. Simultaneously the Israelis are putting forward the proposed Middle East Air Defense Alliance (MEAD) in meetings with the same GCC nations. Going forward, Iran’s nuclear ambitions will give more impetus to these attempts to cooperate on air defense. 4     This is apparent from the hard line on Iran and the relatively soft line on Russia in the document. Israel is wary of taking too hard of a line against Russia because of its security concerns in Syria where Russian forces are present. See footnote 1 above. 5     Khamenei called for long-term cooperation between Russia and Iran; he justified Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a defense against NATO encroachment; he called for the removal of the US dollar as the global reserve currency. See “Khamenei: Tehran, Moscow must stay vigilant against Western deception,” Israel Hayom, July 20, 2022, israelhayom.com. 6     Russia’s natural gas champion Gazprom signed an ostensible $40 billion memorandum of understanding with Iran’s National Oil Company to develop gas fields and pipelines. See Nadeen Ebrahim, “Iran and Russia’s friendship is more complicated than it seems,” CNN, July 20, 2022, cnn.com. However, while there are longstanding obstacles to Russo-Iranian cooperation, the West’s tough new sanctions on Russia and EU diversification will make Moscow more willing to invest in Iran. Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix

Executive Summary Upside Oil Price Risk Dominates Upside Oil Price Risk Dominates Upside Oil Price Risk Dominates Despite global recession fears and uncertainty over Russia’s retaliation for the EU embargo against its exports, oil markets will continue to tighten. After breaching $15/bbl in June, the Dec22 vs Dec23 Brent backwardation – our preferred seasonal indicator for inventory tightness – is back above $10/bbl and rising.  There is an increasing risk Russia will cut crude output, if G7 states impose a price cap on its oil sales.  Our modeling indicates the loss of an additional 2mm b/d of Russian output vs our base case beginning in 4Q22 would lift prices above $220/bbl by 4Q23. On the downside, our modeling indicates the loss of 2mm b/d of demand vs our base case – i.e., essentially wiping out this year’s expected growth – would push average Brent prices toward $60/bbl next year. Our base case forecast for Brent crude oil is unchanged.  We expect 2022 Brent to average $110/bbl, and for 2023 prices to average $117/bbl.  WTI will trade $3-$4/bbl below Brent. Bottom Line: We expect markets to continue to tighten as the EU embargo of Russia oil progresses.  A price cap on Russian oil sales could lead to a production cut that takes prices above $220/bbl by 4Q23.  An economic collapse could push Brent toward $60/bbl.  Risks remain skewed to the upside.  Our base case Brent price forecast remains unchanged: $110/bbl on average this year and $117/bbl in 2023. Feature The global oil market is tightening even with China demand restrained by its zero-Covid-19 tolerance policy, and parts of Europe almost surely facing recession if Russian pipeline gas supplies are cut off or tighten significantly between now and the approach of winter. Upside price risk dominates, in our view. Our Brent price forecast remains unchanged, averaging $110/bbl this year and $117/bbl in 2023. Markets remain tight: Oil supply will remain below demand, which will force inventories to draw (Chart 1). Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyRecession Unlikely To Batter Oil Prices This will push Brent into a steeper backwardation going into year-end, forcing the Dec22 v Dec23 Brent spread higher (Chart 2). High levels of backwardation – i.e., prompt-delivery futures trading above deferred-delivery futures – is how inventory tightness manifests itself: Refiners are willing to pay more for prompt delivery than deferred delivery, because they need oil now to meet demand. This is occurring despite weaker demand coming out of China and EU states, as the latter begins to ration energy supplies ahead of the coming winter. Chart 1Inventories Will Tighten Inventories Will Tighten Inventories Will Tighten Chart 2Markets Will Backwardate Further Markets Will Backwardate Further Markets Will Backwardate Further Russia Risk Is Increasing The supply-side risks that we outlined in last week's report — chiefly the risk Russia will unilaterally cut oil supply if a price cap is imposed by G7 states led by the US – remain in place. We expect the EU to follow through on its commitment to phase out all Russian oil and refined product imports in 2H22 and 1Q23. The EU formally agreed to cut 90% of its Russian oil imports by the end of this year. The EU’s goal is to be completely out of ~ 2.3mm b/d of seaborne crude oil imports and 800k b/d of pipeline imports this year. In 1Q23, the EU will be reducing its refined product imports (e.g., diesel fuel) from Russia as well. Russia will lose more than 4mm b/d of crude and product exports to the EU as a result of these embargoes. We continue to expect the cutoffs in EU exports will result in Russia being forced to shut in 1.6mm b/d of production this year and another 500k b/d next year. In our base case, we expect this to take Russian crude production down from more than 10.5mm b/d prior to its invasion of Ukraine to something close to 8.0mm b/d by the end of next year. Spare capacity remains tight. Almost all of OPEC 2.0’s spare capacity is in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). These are the only two OPEC 2.0 states that are able to increase production and maintain it at higher levels for an indefinite period of time. Despite repeated pleas from the US, these states continue to indicate they do not see the need to sharply increase oil production, even after US President Joe Biden made a trip to the region last week to ask them in person to do so. With ~ 2-3mm b/d of spare capacity available – the exact level is not public knowledge – digging into spare capacity now would leave nothing in the tank, so to speak, to meet another supply shock (e.g., a unilateral cut-off of Russian supplies in response to a G7 price cap on oil sales). KSA, as a matter of policy, maintains a minimal level of spare capacity (1.0 – 1.5mm b/d) to handle unforeseen supply shocks. In addition, the OPEC 2.0 agreement to return production removed from the market during the COVID-19 pandemic agreed last July, and the US release of 1mm b/d of inventories out of its Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) both expire in September.1 The US SPR has not indicated it will extend its release of inventory beyond September. Markets will tighten. The return of barrels from OPEC 2.0 is largely moot, since only KSA and the UAE – which we dub Core OPEC 2.0 – have been able to consistently raise output since the July 2021 agreement to return barrels to the market. The other OPEC 2.0 member states – the “Other Guys” – have consistently missed their production quotas this past year (Chart 3). Lastly, the odds of the US and Iran reaching a rapprochement continue to fade, almost to the point of vanishing. Iran reportedly will supply Russia with drones for its war in Ukraine. This indicates the Iranian government has all but capitulated on reviving its nuclear deal with the US, which would have brought an additional 1mm b/d back on the market.2 Outside of OPEC 2.0, we expect US production in the Lower 48 states ex-US Gulf will increase 0.8mm b/d this year, and 0.75mm b/d next year, given price levels and the shape of the WTI forward curve (Chart 4). This is mostly unchanged from previous production expectations. Chart 3Lower OPEC 2.0 Production ex-KSA, UAE Tighter Oil Markets On The Way Tighter Oil Markets On The Way Chart 4Capital Discipline Drives US Shale Production Growth Capital Discipline Drives US Shale Production Growth Capital Discipline Drives US Shale Production Growth We continue to expect US shale-oil producers will maintain capital discipline, and will continue to prioritize shareholder interests by returning capital to investors via share buybacks and strong dividend distributions. Besides, boosting output over the balance of this year is becoming increasingly difficult, given oil-services equipment shortages and lack of capital.3 In our base case, we continue to anticipate demand will rise by 2.0mm b/d this year and 1.8mm b/d next year. This is lower than our estimates at the start of the year by close to 3mm b/d. This is all down to the sharp GDP growth slowdown forecast by the World Bank last month, which pushed our oil-demand estimates lower.4 Oil demand continues to grow, albeit it slowly, which, against a backdrop of tightening supplies, means the risk to prices remains to the upside. In our base case, the supply-demand fundamentals are largely balanced (Chart 5). These fundamentals (Table 1) are driving our forecast for $110/bbl Brent this year and $117/bbl next year (Chart 6). Chart 5Markets Remain Finely Balanced Markets Remain Finely Balanced Markets Remain Finely Balanced Chart 6Brent Backwardation Will Steepen Brent Backwardation Will Steepen Brent Backwardation Will Steepen Table 1BCA Global Oil Supply - Demand Balances (MMb/d, Base Case Balances) To Dec23 Tighter Oil Markets On The Way Tighter Oil Markets On The Way Uncertain Evolutions: Between $60 And $220/bbl We have noted the heightened uncertainty surrounding our oil-price expectations, which makes forecasting more tentative than usual.5 This week, we consider larger supply and demand shocks via econometric simulations to at least define possible price paths consistent with our assumptions and modeling. To the upside, we estimate a 2mm b/d loss of output resulting from a cutoff of Russian crude oil production. Relative to the status quo ante – i.e., prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February – this would remove a total of ~ 4mm b/d of Russian production from the market (2mm in our base case plus an additional 2mm b/d). Our modeling indicates this could push prices above $220/bbl by 4Q23, depending on how the additional 2mm b/d production cut is implemented – i.e., suddenly or staged pro-rata (Chart 7).6 This high-price scenario would be difficult for markets to adjust to, given the short-term inelasticity of global oil demand. In its wake, we would expect demand destruction on a large scale. Chart 7Upside Oil Price Risk Dominates Upside Oil Price Risk Dominates Upside Oil Price Risk Dominates On the downside, we simulate a sharp contraction in oil consumption that removes an additional 2mm b/d of demand vs our base case – i.e., essentially wiping out this year’s expected growth. This would push average 2023 prices toward $60/bbl in our modeling. Losing this much demand would amount to a global economic collapse. A deep global recession cannot be ruled out, as markets have been reminding us over the past couple of weeks. However, the downside risks are not as pronounced as the upside risks in our estimation. There has not been an excessive accumulation of inventory in the OECD, as Chart 1 indicates. In the non-OECD economies, inventory accumulation in China appears to be intentional and policy driven. In addition, the supply response to sharply lower prices would be met by sharply lower production by KSA and the UAE, along with the US shale-oil producers over the course of a couple of months. This would arrest the down leg a demand shock produced in previous oil-price collapses when production was not as flexible, and inventories adjusted with longer lags. Economic growth in the EU could slow in some but not all of the member states, according to recent IMF estimates.7 The US may slow, and is at risk to a hard landing due to poorly calibrated Fed tightening. This could usher in a deep recession. However, the US also might even benefit from the EU going into recession, since it is not as resource constrained as the EU. Lastly, the EU’s been getting ready for this Russian energy cut-off and has lined up alternative energy sources (LNG and coal mostly). In addition, states already have begun asking their citizens to conserve energy, particularly natural gas. This forced conservation can achieve significant energy savings and is not new to the world: It was demonstrated by Japan after the Fukushima disaster in 2011 and the US in the late 1970s. Investment Implications Our base case oil-price forecast remains $110/bbl and $117/bbl on average for this year and next. Simulations of uncertain prices evolutions – i.e., evolutions we cannot attach a probability to at present – indicate upside price risk is dominant. This inclines us to remain long oil equities via the XOP ETF. We were tactically long 4Q22 and 1Q23 TTF futures until stop losses on both trades were elected on July 15th, generating returns of 89.6% and 83.1% respectively.   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com     Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish Markets will await the conclusion of maintenance on the Nord Stream 1 (NS1) pipeline scheduled for this week. We continue to expect a cut-off of Russian natgas shipments to Europe, in addition to the 60% of volumes that already have been cut. In its latest GDP forecasts, the IMF expects EU GDP growth of 2.9% and 2.5% in 2022 and 2023, respectively. In and of itself, this would support our expectation for oil prices averaging $110/bbl and $117/bbl this year and next, as it is in line with the GDP forecast expected by the World Bank, which drives our forecasts. However, EU GDP still could contract in response to a complete shut-off of Russian gas imports in 2H22, particularly if it is sudden and prompts the EU to go to Phase 3 of its energy emergency plan and invoke gas rationing. EU gas inventories continue to build going into winter (Chart 8). Markets are critically dialed in to how the inventory builds ahead of winter proceed following NS1 maintenance: If it is delayed for technical reasons the storage fill rate will slow. Base Metals: Bullish China formally created a state-backed company to oversee all of its iron ore imports and overseas ore assets on Tuesday. The purpose of this company is to wrest pricing power away from iron ore suppliers – most of which are based in Australia – and reduce its reliance on Australian iron ore imports. A single buying entity will effectively create a monopsony, since China imports ~70% of global iron ore to supply its steel making industry, the largest in the world. Precious Metals: Bullish We have tactically downgraded our gold view on the back of continued USD strength. Reports of civil unrest in China – which was forecast by BCA’s Geopolitical Strategy - arising from the unfolding mortgage crisis likely will boost demand for gold, but it will boost demand for USD even more, in our view (Chart 9). We are closely monitoring this situation, along with possible increases in systemic financial risk in Chinese banks, which also would support USD demand. We remain strategically bullish gold. Chart 8 Tighter Oil Markets On The Way Tighter Oil Markets On The Way Chart 9 Nominal Broad US Dollar Index Going Up Nominal Broad US Dollar Index Going Up       Footnotes 1     Please see OPEC+ agrees oil supply boost after UAE, Saudi reach compromise and U.S. to sell up to 45 mln bbls oil from reserve as part of historic release published by reuters.com on July 19, 2021 and June 14, 2022, respectively. OPEC 2.0 is our moniker for the producer coalition led by KSA and Russia; it also is referred to as OPEC+ in the media. 2     This could presage an unravelling of the status quo in the Middle East, as our colleagues at BCA Research’s Geopolitical Strategy highlight in their most recent report Questions From The Road published on July 15, 2022. 3    Please see Fracking Growth ‘Almost Impossible’ This Year, Halliburton Says, published by bloomberg.com on July 19, 2022. 4    Please see Recession Unlikely To Batter Oil Prices, which we published on June 16, 2022. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 5    Running simulations is a good way to identify risks and at least have an intuition for where prices might go given difference evolutions of fundamentals. Please see Russia Pulls Oil, Gas Supply Strings for discussions and simulations of prices in response to different supply and shocks we ran last week. 6    The timing and depth of the shocks we simulate here are not assigned a probability to express our view of their likelihood. This reflects our belief that these are highly uncertain outcomes. That said, having an intuition for what to expect should the markets evolve in such a way as to create a probability one of these outcomes has become likely is useful. 7     The smaller EU economies are most at risk to sharp economic downturns from a cutoff in Russian gas exports, according to the IMF. The Fund estimates that in “Hungary, the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic—there is a risk of shortages of as much as 40 percent of gas consumption and of gross domestic product shrinking by up to 6 percent.” Please see How a Russian Natural Gas Cutoff Could Weigh on Europe’s Economies published by the IMF on July 19, 2022. Investment Views and Themes Recommendations We were stopped out of our Long 4Q22 TTF Futures trade on July 15, with a return of 89.6%. We were stopped out of our Long 1Q23 TTF Futures trade on July 15, with a  return of 83.1%.  Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022

Listen to a short summary of this report.     Executive Summary The TIPS Market Foresees A Sharp Deceleration In Inflation What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right? TIPS breakevens are pointing to a rapid decline in US inflation over the next two years. If the TIPS are right, the Fed will not need to raise rates faster than what is already discounted over the next six months. Falling inflation will allow real wages to start rising again. This will bolster consumer confidence, making a recession less likely. The surprising increase in analyst EPS estimates this year partly reflects the contribution of increased energy profits and the fact that earnings are expressed in nominal terms while economic growth is usually expressed in real terms. Nevertheless, even a mild recession would probably knock down operating earnings by 15%-to-20%. While a recession in the US is not our base case, it is for Europe. A European recession is likely to be short-lived with the initial shock from lower Russian gas flows counterbalanced by income-support measures and ramped-up spending on energy infrastructure and defense. We are setting a limit order to buy EUR/USD at 0.981. Bottom Line: Stocks lack an immediate macro driver to move higher, but that driver should come in the form of lower inflation prints starting as early as next month. Investors should maintain a modest overweight to global equities. That said, barring any material developments, we would turn neutral on stocks if the S&P 500 were to rise above 4,050. US CPI Surprises to the Upside… Again        Investors hoping for some relief on the inflation front were disappointed once again this week. The US headline CPI rose 1.32% month-over-month in June, above the consensus of 1.1%. Core inflation increased to 0.71%, surpassing consensus estimates of 0.5%. The key question is how much of June’s report is “water under the bridge” and how much is a harbinger of things to come. Since the CPI data for June was collected, oil prices have dropped to below $100/bbl. Nationwide gasoline prices have fallen for four straight weeks, with the futures market pointing to further declines in the months ahead. Agriculture and metals prices have swooned. Used car prices are heading south. Wage growth has slowed to about 4% from around 6.5% in the second half of last year. The rate of change in the Zillow rent index has rolled over, albeit from high levels (Chart 1). The Zumper National Rent index is sending a similar message as the Zillow data.  All this suggests that inflation may be peaking. The TIPS market certainly agrees. It is discounting a rapid decline in US inflation over the next few years. This week’s inflation report did little to change that fact (Chart 2). Chart 1Some Signs That Inflation Has Peaked Some Signs That Inflation Has Peaked Some Signs That Inflation Has Peaked Chart 2Investors Expect Inflation To Fall Rapidly Over The Next Few Years What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right? TIPS Still Siding with Team Transitory If the TIPS market is right, this would have two important implications. First, the Fed would not need to raise rates more quickly over the next six months than the OIS curve is currently discounting (although it probably would not need to cut rates in 2023 either, given our higher-than-consensus view of where the US neutral rate lies) (Chart 3). The second implication is that real wages, which have declined over the past year, will start rising again as inflation heads lower. Falling real wages have sapped consumer confidence. As real wage growth turns positive, confidence will improve, helping to bolster consumer spending (Chart 4). To the extent that consumption accounts for nearly 70% of the US economy – and other components of GDP such as investment generally take their cues from consumer spending – this would significantly raise the odds of a soft landing.  Chart 3The Fed Is Signaling That It Will Raise Rates To Almost 4% In 2023 The Fed Is Signaling That It Will Raise Rates To Almost 4% In 2023 The Fed Is Signaling That It Will Raise Rates To Almost 4% In 2023 Chart 4Positive Real Wage Growth Will Provide A Boost To Consumer Confidence Positive Real Wage Growth Will Provide A Boost To Consumer Confidence Positive Real Wage Growth Will Provide A Boost To Consumer Confidence Chart 5Long-Term Inflation Expectations Remain Well Anchored Long-Term Inflation Expectations Remain Well Anchored Long-Term Inflation Expectations Remain Well Anchored Of course, the TIPS market could be wrong. Bond traders do not set prices and wages. Businesses and workers, interacting with each other, ultimately determine the direction of inflation. Yet, the view of the TIPS market is broadly in sync with the view of most households and businesses. Expected inflation 5-to-10 years out in the University of Michigan survey has risen since the pandemic began, but at about 3%, it is close to where it was for most of the period between 1995 and 2015 (Chart 5). As we pointed out in our recently published Third Quarter Strategy Outlook, and as I discussed in last week’s webcast, the fact that long-term inflation expectations are well anchored implies that the sacrifice ratio – the amount of output that must be forgone to bring down inflation by a given amount — may be quite low. This also raises the odds of a soft landing. Investors Now See Recession as the Base Case Our relatively sanguine view of the US economy leaves us in the minority camp. According to recent polling, more than 70% of US adults expect the economy to be in recession by year-end. Within the investment community, nearly half of retail traders and three-quarters of high-level asset allocators expect a recession within the next 12 months (Chart 6). Chart 6Many Investors Now See Recession As Baked In The Cake What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right? Reflecting the downbeat mood among investors, bears exceeded bulls by 20 points in the most recent weekly poll by the American Association of Individual Investors (Chart 7). A record low percentage of respondents in the New York Fed’s Survey of Consumer Expectations believes stocks will rise over the next year (Chart 8). Chart 7Bears Exceed The Bulls By A Wide Margin Bears Exceed The Bulls By A Wide Margin Bears Exceed The Bulls By A Wide Margin Chart 8Households Are Pessimistic On Stocks Households Are Pessimistic On Stocks Households Are Pessimistic On Stocks Resilient Earnings Estimates Admittedly, while sentiment on the economy and the stock market has soured, analyst earnings estimates have yet to decline significantly. In fact, in both the US and the euro area, EPS estimates for 2022 and 2023 are higher today than they were at the start of the year (Chart 9). What’s going on? Part of the explanation reflects the sectoral composition of earnings. In the US, earnings estimates for 2022 are up 2.4% so far this year. Outside of the energy sector, however, 2022 earnings estimates are down 2.2% year-to-date and down 2.9% from their peak in February (Chart 10). Chart 9US And European EPS Estimates Are Up Year-To-Date US And European EPS Estimates Are Up Year-To-Date US And European EPS Estimates Are Up Year-To-Date Another explanation centers on the fact that earnings estimates are expressed in nominal terms while GDP growth is usually expressed in real terms. When inflation is elevated, the difference between real and nominal variables can be important. For example, while US real GDP contracted by 1.6% in Q1, nominal GDP rose by 6.6%. Gross Domestic Income (GDI), which conceptually should equal GDP but can differ due to measurement issues, rose by 1.8% in real terms and by a whopping 10.2% in nominal terms in Q1. Chart 10Soaring Energy Prices Have Boosted Earnings Estimates Soaring Energy Prices Have Boosted Earnings Estimates Soaring Energy Prices Have Boosted Earnings Estimates How Much Bad News Has Been Discounted? Historically, stocks have peaked at approximately the same time as forward earnings estimates have reached their apex. This time around, stocks have swooned well in advance of any cut to earnings estimates (Chart 11). At the time of writing, the S&P 500 was down 25% in real terms from its peak on January 3. Chart 11Unlike In Past Cycles, Stocks Peaked Well Before Earnings What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right? This suggests that investors have already discounted some earnings cuts, even if analysts have yet to pencil them in. Consistent with this observation, two-thirds of investors in a recent Bloomberg poll agreed that analysts were “behind the curve” in responding to the deteriorating macro backdrop (Chart 12). Chart 12Most Investors Expect Analyst Earnings Estimates To Come Down What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right? Nevertheless, it is likely that stocks would fall further if the economy were to enter a recession. Even in mild recessions, operating profits have fallen by about 15%-to-20% (Chart 13). That is probably a more severe outcome than the market is currently discounting. Chart 13Even A Mild Recession Could Significantly Knock Down Earnings Estimates Even A Mild Recession Could Significantly Knock Down Earnings Estimates Even A Mild Recession Could Significantly Knock Down Earnings Estimates Subjectively, we would expect the S&P 500 to drop to 3,500 over the next 12 months in a mild recession scenario where growth falls into negative territory for a few quarters (30% odds) and to 2,900 in a deep recession scenario where the unemployment rate rises by more than four percentage points from current levels (10% odds). On the flipside, we would expect the S&P 500 to rebound to 4,500 in a scenario where a recession is completely averted (60% odds). A probability-weighted average of these three scenarios produces an expected total return of 8.3% (Table 1). This is enough to warrant a modest overweight to stocks, but just barely. Barring any material developments, we would turn neutral on stocks if the S&P 500 were to rise above 4,050. Table 1A Scenario Analysis For The S&P 500 What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right? What’s the Right Framework for Thinking About a European Recession? Whereas we would assign 40% odds to a recession in the US over the next 12 months, we would put the odds of a recession in Europe at around 60%. With a recession in Europe looking increasingly probable, a key question is what the nature of this recession would be. The pandemic may provide a useful framework for answering that question. Just as the pandemic represented an external shock to the global economy, the disruption to energy supplies, stemming from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, represents an external shock to the European economy. In the initial phase of the pandemic, economic activity in developed economies collapsed as millions of workers were forced to isolate at home. Over the following months, however, the proliferation of work-from-home practices, the easing of lockdown measures, and ample fiscal support permitted growth to recover. Eventually, vaccines became available, which allowed for a further shift to normal life. Just as it took about two years for vaccines to become widely deployed, it will take time for Europe to wean itself off its dependence on Russian natural gas. Earlier this year, the IEA reckoned that the EU could displace more than a third of Russian gas imports within a year. The more ambitious REPowerEU plan foresees two-thirds of Russian gas being displaced by the end of 2022. In the meantime, some Russian gas will be necessary. Canada’s decision over Ukrainian objections to return a repaired turbine to Germany for use in the Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline suggests that a full cutoff of Russian gas flows is unlikely. Chart 14The Euro Is 26% Undervalued Against The Dollar Based On PPP The Euro Is 26% Undervalued Against The Dollar Based On PPP The Euro Is 26% Undervalued Against The Dollar Based On PPP During the pandemic, governments wasted little time in passing legislation to ease the burden on households and businesses. The European energy crunch will elicit a similar response. Back when I worked at the IMF, a common mantra in designing lending programs was that one should “finance temporary shocks but adjust to permanent ones.” The current situation Europe is a textbook example for the merits of providing income support to the private sector, financed by temporarily larger public deficits. The ECB’s soon-to-be-launched “anti-fragmentation” program will allow the central bank to buy the government debt of Italy and other at-risk sovereign borrowers without the need for a formal European Stability Mechanism (ESM) program, provided that the long-term debt profile of the borrowers remains sustainable. Get Ready to Buy the Euro All this suggests that Europe could see a fairly brisk rebound after the energy crunch abates. If the euro area recovers quickly, the euro – which is now about as undervalued against the dollar as anytime in its history (Chart 14) – will soar. With that in mind, we are setting a limit order to buy EUR/USD at 0.981.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on  LinkedIn & Twitter   Global Investment Strategy View Matrix What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right? Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores What If The TIPS Are Right? What If The TIPS Are Right?

Executive Summary China's Unemployment Questions From The Road Questions From The Road Over the past week we have been visiting clients along the US west coast. In this report we hit some of the highlights from the most important and frequently asked questions. Xi Jinping is seizing absolute power just as the country’s decades-long property boom turns to bust. He will stimulate the economy but Chinese stimulus is less effective than it used to be. The US and Israel are underscoring their red line against Iranian nuclear weaponization. If Iran does not freeze its nuclear program, the Middle East will begin to unravel again. The UK’s domestic instability is returning, with Scotland threatening to leave the union. Brexit, the pandemic, and inflation make a Scottish referendum a more serious risk than in the past. Shinzo Abe’s assassination makes him a martyr for a vision of Japan as a “normal country” – i.e. one that is not pacifist but capable of defending itself. Japan’s rearmament, like Germany’s, points to the decline of the WWII peace settlement and the return of great power competition. Bottom Line: Investors need a new global balance to be achieved through US diplomacy with Russia, China, and Iran. That is not forthcoming, as the chief nations face instability at home and a stagflationary global economy. Feature The world is becoming less stable as stagflation combines with great power competition. Global uncertainty is through the roof. From a macroeconomic perspective, investors need to know whether central banks can whip inflation without triggering a recession. From a geopolitical perspective, investors need to know whether Russia’s conflict with the West will expand, whether US-China and US-Iran tensions will escalate in a damaging way, and whether domestic political rotations in the US and China this fall will lead to more stable and productive economies. China: What Will Happen At The Communist Party Reshuffle? General Secretary Xi Jinping will cement another five-to-10 years in power while promoting members of his faction into key positions on the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee. By December Xi will roll out a pro-growth strategy for 2023 and the government will signal that it will start relaxing Covid-19 restrictions. But China’s structural problems ensure that this good news for global growth will only have a fleeting effect. China’s governance is shifting from single-party rule to single-person rule. It is also shifting from commercially focused decentralization to national security focused centralization. Xi has concentrated power in himself, in the party, and in Beijing at the expense of political opponents, the private economy, and outlying regions like Hong Kong, the South China Sea, and Xinjiang. The subordination of Taiwan is the next major project, ensuring that China will ally with Russia and that the US and China cannot repair or deepen their economic partnership. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyWill China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Xi and the Communist Party began centralizing political power and economic control shortly after the Great Recession. At that time it became clear that a painful transition away from export manufacturing and close relations with the United States was necessary. The transition would jeopardize China’s long-term economic, social, political, and geopolitical stability. The Communist Party believed it needed to revive strongman leadership (autocracy) rather than pursuing greater liberalization that would ultimately increase the odds of political revolution (democratization). The Xi administration has struggled to manage the country’s vast debt bubble, given that total debt standing has surged to 287% of GDP. The global pandemic forced the government to launch another large stimulus package, which it then attempted to contain. Corporate and household deleveraging ensued. The property and infrastructure boom of the past three decades has stalled, as the regime has imposed liquidity and capital requirements on banks and property developers to try to avoid a financial crisis. Regulatory tightening occurred in other sectors to try to steer investment into government-approved sectors and reduce the odds of technological advancement fanning social dissent. China’s draconian “zero Covid” policy sought to limit the disease’s toll, improve China’s economic self-reliance, and eliminate the threat of social protest during the year of the twentieth party congress. But it also slammed the brakes on growth. China is highly vulnerable to social instability for both structural and cyclical reasons. Chinese social unrest was our number one “Black Swan” for this year and it is now starting to take shape in the form of angry mortgage owners across the country refusing to make mortgage payments on houses that were pre-purchased but not yet built and delivered (Chart 1). Chart 1China: Mortgage Payment Boycott Questions From The Road Questions From The Road The mortgage payment boycott is important because it is stemming from the outstanding economic and financial imbalance – the property sector – and because it is a form of cross-regional social organization, which the Communist Party will disapprove. There are other social protests emerging, including low-level bank runs, which must be monitored very closely. Local authorities will act quickly to stop the spread of the mortgage boycott. But unhappy homeowners will be a persistent problem due to the decline of the property sector and industry. China’s property sector looks uncomfortably like the American property sector ahead of the 2006-08 bust. Prices for existing homes are falling while new house prices are on the verge of falling (Chart 2). While mortgages only make up 15% of bank assets, and household debt is only 62% of GDP, households are no longer taking on new debt (Chart 3). Chart 2China's Falling Property Prices China's Falling Property Prices China's Falling Property Prices ​​​​​​ Chart 3China's Property Crisis China's Property Crisis China's Property Crisis ​​​​​​ Chart 4China's Unemployment China's Unemployment China's Unemployment Most likely China’s property sector is entering the bust phase that we have long expected – if not, then the reason will be a rapid and aggressive move by authorities to expand monetary and fiscal stimulus and loosen economic restrictions. That process of broad-based easing – “letting 100 flowers bloom” – will not fully get under way until after the party congress, say in December. Unemployment is rising across China as the economy slows, another point of comparison with the United States ahead of the 2008 property collapse (Chart 4). Unemployment is a manipulated statistic so real conditions are likely worse. There is no more important indicator. China’s government will be forced to ease policy, creating a positive impact on global growth in 2023, but the impact will be fleeting. Bottom Line: The underlying debt-deflationary context will prevail before long in China, weighing on global growth and inflation expectations on a cyclical basis. Middle East: Why Did Biden Go And What Will He Get? President Biden traveled to Israel and now Saudi Arabia because he wants Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arab members of OPEC to increase oil production to reduce gasoline prices at the pump for Americans ahead of the midterm elections (Chart 5). Chart 5Biden Goes To Israel And Saudi Arabia Biden Goes To Israel And Saudi Arabia Biden Goes To Israel And Saudi Arabia True, fears of recession are already weighing on prices, but Biden embarked on this mission before the growth slowdown was fully appreciated and he is not going to lightly abandon the anti-inflation fight before the midterm election. Biden also went because one of his top foreign policy priorities – the renegotiation of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran – is falling apart. The Iranians do not want to freeze their nuclear program because they want regime survival and security. While Biden is offering a return to the 2015 deal, the conditions that produced the deal are no longer applicable: Russia and China are not cooperating with the US and EU to isolate Iran. Russia is courting Iran, oil prices are high and sanction enforcement is weak (unlike 2015). The Iranians now know, after the Trump administration, that they cannot trust the Americans to give credible security guarantees that will last across parties and administrations. The war in Ukraine also underscores the weakness of diplomatic security guarantees as opposed to a nuclear deterrent. Hence the joint US and Israeli declaration that Iran will never be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons. The good news is that this kind of joint statement is precisely what needed to occur – the underscoring of the red line – to try to change Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s calculus regarding his drive to achieve nuclear breakout. In 2015 Khamenei gave diplomacy a chance to try to improve the economy, stave off social unrest, prepare the way for his eventual leadership succession process, and secure the Islamic Republic. The bad news is that Khamenei probably cannot make the same decision this time, as the hawkish faction now runs his government, the Americans are unreliable, and Russia and China are offering an alternative strategic orientation. The Saudis will pump more oil if necessary to save the global business cycle but not at the beck and call of a US president. The drop in oil prices reduces their urgency. The Americans can reassure the Saudis and Israel as long as the deal with Iran is not going forward. That looks to be the case. But then the US and Israel will have to undertake joint actions to underline their threat to Iran – and Iran will have to threaten to stage attacks across the region so as to deter any attack. Bottom Line: If a US-Iran deal does not materialize at the last minute, Middle Eastern instability will revive and a new source of oil supply constraint will plague the global economy. We continue to believe a US-Iran deal is unlikely, with only 40% odds of happening. Europe: Will Russia Turn Back On The Natural Gas? Russia’s objective in cutting off European natural gas is to inflict a recession on Europe. It wants a better bargaining position on strategic matters. Therefore we assume Russia will continue to squeeze supplies from now through the winter, when European demand rises and Russian leverage will peak. If Russia allows some flow to return, then it will be part of the negotiating process and will not preclude another cutoff before winter. It is possible that Russia is merely giving Europe a warning and will revert back to supplying natural gas. The problem is that Russia’s purpose is to achieve a strategic victory in Ukraine and in negotiations over NATO’s role in the Nordic countries. Russia has not achieved these goals, so natural gas cutoff will likely continue. Russia also hopes that by utilizing its energy leverage – while it still has it – it will bring forward the economic pain of Europe’s transition away from reliance on Russian energy. In that case European countries will experience recession and households will begin to change their view of the situation. European governments will be more likely to change their policies, to become more pragmatic and less confrontational toward Russia. Or European governments will be voted out of power and do the same thing. Other states could join Hungary in saying that Europe should never impose a full natural gas embargo on Russia. Russia would be able to salvage some of its energy trade with Europe over the long run, despite the war in Ukraine and the inevitable European energy diversification. In recent months we highlighted Italy as the weakest link in the European chain and the country most likely to see such a shift in policy occur. Italy’s national unity coalition had lost its reason for being, while the combination of rising bond yields and natural gas prices weighed on the economy. The Italian bond spread over German bunds has long served as our indicator of European political stress – and it is spiking now, forcing the European Central Bank to rush to plan an anti-fragmentation strategy that would theoretically enable it to tighten monetary policy while preventing an Italian debt crisis (Chart 6). The European Union remains unlikely to break up – Russian aggression was always one of our chief arguments for why the EU would stick together. But Italy will undergo a recession and an election (due by June 2023 but that could easily happen this fall), likely producing a new government that is more pragmatic with regard to Russia so as to reduce the energy strain. Chart 6Italy's Crisis Points To EU Divisions On Russia Italy's Crisis Points To EU Divisions On Russia Italy's Crisis Points To EU Divisions On Russia Italy’s political turmoil shows that European states are feeling the energy crisis and will begin to shift policies to reduce the burden on households. Households will lose their appetite for conflict with Russia on behalf of Ukrainians, especially if Russia begins offering a ceasefire after completing its conquest of the Donetsk area. If Russia expands its invasion, then Europe will expand sanctions and the risk of further strategic instability will go up. But most likely Russia will seek to quit while it is ahead and twist Europe’s arm into foisting a ceasefire onto Ukraine. Bottom Line: A change of government in Italy will increase the odds that the EU will engage in diplomacy with Russia in the coming year, if Russia offers, so as to reach a new understanding, restore natural gas flows, and salvage the economy. This would leave NATO enlargement unresolved but a shift in favor of a ceasefire in Ukraine in 2023 would be less negative for European assets and the euro. UK: Who Will Replace Boris Johnson? Last week UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson fell from power and now the Conservative Party is engaging in a leadership competition to replace him. We gave up on Johnson after he survived his no-confidence vote and yet it became clear that he could not recover in popular opinion. The inflation outburst destroyed his premiership and wiped away whatever support he had gained from executing Brexit. In fact it reinforced the faction that believed Brexit was the wrong decision. Going forward the UK will be consumed with domestic political turmoil as the cost of stagflation mounts, and geopolitical turmoil as Scotland attempts to hold a second independence referendum, possibly by October 2023. Global investors should focus primarily on Scotland’s attempt to secede, since the breakup of the United Kingdom would be a momentous historical event and a huge negative shock for pound sterling. While only 44.7% of Scots voted for independence in 2014, now they have witnessed Brexit, Covid-19, and stagflation, producing tailwinds for the Scots nationalist vote (Chart 7). Chart 7Forget Bojo's Exit, Watch Scotland Questions From The Road Questions From The Road There are still major limitations on Scotland exiting, since its national capabilities are limited, it would need to join the European Union, and Spain and possibly others will threaten to veto its membership in the European Union for fear of feeding their own secessionist movements. But any new referendum – including one done without the approval of Westminster – should be taken very seriously by investors. Bottom Line: Johnson’s removal will only marginally improve the Tories’ ability to manage the rebellion brewing in the north. A snap election that brings the Labour Party back into power would have a greater chance of keeping Scotland in the union, although it is not clear that such a snap election will happen in time to affect any Scottish decision. The UK faces economic and political turmoil between now and any referendum and investors should steer clear of the pound. (Though we still favor GBP over eastern European currencies). Britain will remain aggressive toward Russia but its ability to affect the Russian dynamic will fall, leaving the US and EU to decide the fate of Russian relations. Japan: What Is The Significance Of Shinzo Abe’s Assassination? Former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was assassinated by a lone fanatic with a handmade gun. The significance of the incident is that Abe will become a martyr for a certain vision of Japan – his vision of Japan, which is that Japan can become a “normal country” that moves beyond the shackles of the guilt of its imperial aggression in World War II. A normal country is one that is economically stable and militarily capable of defending itself – not a pacifist country mired in debt-deflation. Abe stood for domestic reflation and a proactive foreign policy, along with the normalization of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces (JSDF). True, economic policy can become less dovish if necessary to deal with inflation. Some changes at the Bank of Japan may usher in a less dovish shift in monetary policy in particular. But monetary policy cannot become outright hawkish like it was before Abe. And Abe’s fiscal policy was never as loose as it was made out to be, given that he executed several hikes to the consumption tax. Japan’s structural demographic decline and large debt burden will continue to weigh on economic activity whenever real rates and the yen rise. The government will be forced to reflate using monetary and fiscal policy whenever deflation threatens to return. Debt monetization will remain an option for future Japanese governments, even if it is restrained during times of high inflation. Chart 8Shinzo Abe's Legacy Questions From The Road Questions From The Road ​​​​​​​ This is not only because Japanese households will become depressed if deflation is left unchecked but also because economic growth must be maintained in order to sustain the nation’s new and growing national defense budgets. Japan’s growing need for self defense stems from China’s strategic rise, Russia’s aggression, and North Korea’s nuclearization, plus uncertainty about the future of American foreign policy. These trends will not change anytime soon. Indeed the Liberal Democratic Party’s popularity has increased under Abe’s successor, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who will largely sustain Abe’s vision. The Diet still has a supermajority in favor of constitutional revision so as to enshrine the self-defense forces (Chart 8). And the de facto policy of rearmament continues even without formal revision. Bottom Line: Any Japanese leader who attempts to promote a hawkish BoJ, and a dovish JSDF, will fail sooner rather than later. The revolving door of prime ministers will accelerate. As Japan’s longest-serving prime minister, Shinzo Abe opened up the reliable pathway, which is that of a dovish BoJ and a hawkish foreign policy. This is important for the world, as well as Japan, because a more hawkish Japan will increase China’s fears of strategic containment. The frozen conflicts in Asia will continue to thaw, perpetuating the secular rise in geopolitical risk. We remain long JPY-KRW, since the BoJ may adjust in the short term and Chinese stimulus is still compromised, but that trade is on downgrade watch. Investment Takeaways Russia’s energy cutoff is aimed at pushing Europe into recession so as to force policy changes or government changes in Europe that will improve Russia’s position at the negotiating table over Ukraine, NATO, and other strategic disputes. Hence Russia is unlikely to increase the natural gas flow until it believes it has achieved its strategic aims and multiple veto players in the EU will prevent the EU from ever implementing a full-blown natural gas embargo. Chinese stimulus cannot be fully effective until it relaxes Covid-19 restrictions, likely beginning in December or next year when Xi Jinping uses his renewed political capital to try to stabilize the economy. However, China’s government powers alone are insufficient to prevent the debt-deflationary tendency of the property bust. The Middle East faces rising geopolitical tensions that will take markets by surprise with additional energy supply constraints. The implication is continued oil volatility given that global growth is faltering. Once global demand stabilizes, the Middle East’s turmoil will add to existing oil supply constraints to create new price pressures. The odds are not very high of the Federal Reserve achieving a “soft landing” in the context of a global energy shock and a stagflationary Europe and China.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com ​​​​​​​ Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix "Batting Average": Geopolitical Strategy Trades () Section II: Special (EDIT this Header) Section III: Geopolitical Calendar

Executive Summary Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower Markets remain alert for indications of what Russia will do next. Last week, President Vladimir Putin threatened “catastrophic consequences” if G7 states are able to impose a price cap on Russian oil sales. A sharp drop in output – more than 3mm b/d – would send prices sharply higher, and could not be replaced in 2H22. KSA and the UAE are signaling their limited ability to significantly increase oil output ahead of US President Joseph Biden’s visit to the region later this week. Our simulation of demand losses of ~500k b/d in 2H22 and ~1.0mm b/d in 2023 suggests Brent could fall $7/bbl to $108/bb in 2H22 and $8/bbl to $109/bbl in 2023, all else equal. A Russian court decision last week briefly halted flows on the Caspian Pipeline Consortium’s (CPC) 1.3mm b/d line moving Kazakh oil to the Black Sea through Russia, adding a new variable into supply-side modeling. A trivial fine was levied, but a larger message was delivered. Sporadic force majeure declarations and output losses in Libya, where Russian mercenaries actively support Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA), continue to make supply assessments difficult. Bottom Line: Tight supply fundamentals will keep oil markets volatile and biased to the upside, despite recurrent recession fears overwhelming demand expectations.  While a deep recession cannot be discounted, we remain focused on the objective fact of physically tight markets, and Russia's political-economy considerations affecting the evolution of prices. Feature Anyone who has spent time in trading markets will appreciate the implications of a $65-at-$380/bbl bid-ask spread on Brent. This two-way quote represents worst cases scenarios on the demand and supply sides of the market. And huge uncertainty. The bid comes from Citi’s recession-driven view, while the offer is courtesy of JP Morgan’s worst-case supply-shock assessment – i.e., Russia pulling 5mm b/d off the market if G7 states impose a price cap on its exports.1 Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyCopper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Of late, demand-side concerns are driving markets, along with other technical factors we discussed in last week’s report on copper: low liquidity in trading markets; elevated global policy uncertainty, as seen by the two-way quote above; worries Fed tightening will overshoot the mark as it attempts to control hotter inflation, and an expansion of Russia’s economic war that now engulfs Ukraine.2 The latter point touches on events that cross commodity markets globally: Russia is threatening “catastrophic consequences” if G7 states impose a price cap on its oil sales. This goes directly to the supply side, as it most likely entails a dramatic gesture to reduce crude oil output sharply – i.e., more than 3mm b/d – which would send prices soaring. Russia’s coffers are in excellent shape at present, given the high prices its oil, gas and coal producers have been able to fetch since it invaded Ukraine.3 In our modeling, if Russia were to cut the 2.3mm b/d of crude and condensate it sent to Europe last year, Brent prices would move above $140/bbl.4 Higher volumes taken off the market would result in higher prices. These factors all interact with each other producing feedback loops – e.g., higher uncertainty causes lower liquidity in hedging markets and wider bid-ask spreads on smaller volumes – affecting decisions on everything from capex levels to headcounts. Demand Concerns Consume Markets Last month, we lowered our Brent forecast for this year and next to $110/bbl and $117/bbl, respectively, on the back of a sharp downgrade in global growth expectations from the World Bank. The Bank’s forecast prompted us to reduce our 2022 oil demand growth forecast to 2.0mm b/d this year vs 4.8mm b/d in our January forecast, and, for next year, to 1.8mm b/d. Given the obvious concern in markets, we simulated another hit to demand of 500k b/d in 2H22 and 1.0mm b/d next year, due to a further markdown in real GDP growth. This scenario brings our demand growth expectation down to 1.5mm b/d this year and 800k b/d next year. In this simulation, the lower GDP growth takes our average price expectation for 2H22 to $108/bbl and $109/bbl next year, or $7/bbl and $8/bbl lower, respectively (Chart 1). The lower demand we model here is offset to some degree by our maintained hypothesis that OPEC 2.0 – particularly its core producers Saudi Arabia and the UAE – will temper production somewhat (Chart 2), so as not to produce very large unintended inventory accumulations (Chart 3). Chart 1Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower This concern is particularly acute if these producers receive new information that demand is slowing more than they expected. We are certain this will come up when US President Biden is in Riyadh later this week to meet Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud (MBS), to again discuss, among other things, the Kingdom’s ability and willingness to increase supply. Chart 2Core OPEC 2.0 Will Temper Production Increases... Core OPEC 2.0 Will Temper Production Increases... Core OPEC 2.0 Will Temper Production Increases... Chart 3...To Avoid Unintended Inventory Accumulations ...To Avoid Unintended Inventory Accumulations ...To Avoid Unintended Inventory Accumulations Russia Exerts Supply-Side Influence Russia is at war with Ukraine and the West – i.e., the G7 and NATO states arming and actively seeking to limit its access to revenues from the sale of hydrocarbons. Russia is treating this as a war, and it is operating on multiple fronts, in addition to its kinetic engagement with Ukrainian forces. In a market as finely balanced and uncertain as the current one, small, unexpected shifts in supply or demand can have outsized effects. Last week, for example, a decision by a Russian court briefly halted flows on the Caspian Pipeline Consortium’s (CPC) 1.3mm b/d line moving Kazakh oil to the Black Sea. This boosted prices more than 5% over the ensuing couple of days. Flows were allowed to resume after trivial fine was paid and prices fell. But a larger message was delivered. This remains a powerful lever Moscow can use at a moment’s notice to tighten supplies. Opportunities elsewhere in oil-producing provinces also are continuously cultivated by Russian operatives to influence supplies. Sporadic public demonstrations and force majeure declarations have led to output losses in Libya, where Russian mercenaries actively support Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA). This continues to make supply assessments difficult. Libya currently produces ~ 650k b/d, according to the US EIA, down from ~ 1.12mm b/d in 4Q21. As in many things, Russia’s playing a game of chess with its opponents and forcing them to react to its threats and decisions. And this strategy is not limited to Ukraine, the EU or oil. For example, the seizure of Shell’s ownership in the Sakhalin-2 LNG facilities by Russia’s state-owned Gazprom was described by The Journal of Petroleum Technology (JPT) as a “backdoor” nationalization of Shell’s interest. This will have long-term consequences far removed from the Ukraine War, and could affect LNG deliveries to Japan and South Korea, which will become critical in a super-tight LNG market going into winter. This couldn’t be more timely, as Japan and South Korean – in a first-ever event – attended the end-June NATO meeting.5 Investment Implications Russia’s war against Ukraine has multiple dimensions, all of which can impact oil and gas prices going forward. Despite the obvious concerns over a deep recession reducing global oil demand – and commodity demand generally – we continue to focus on the objective fact of physically tight markets, and Russia's political-economy considerations affecting the evolution of prices. This informs our view that prices will remain volatile with a significant bias to the upside. Small, unexpected shocks in a fundamentally tight market on the supply side support our view prices will move higher.   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com     Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish Whether the EU can avoid rationing – and fill its natural-gas storage – ahead of winter will depend on what Russia does with its exports of the gas exported on Nord Stream 1 (NS1) and other pipes (Chart 4). We believe Russia will cut off most of its exports to the EU before winter sets in. It likely will use use the current 10-day maintenance on NS1, which began Monday, as a pretext to cut supplies, in retaliation for the EU cutting off crude oil and refined products imports. President Putin of Russia most likely will offer to keep the gas flowing so inventories can be refilled, in return for the EU lifting sanctions it imposed following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Precious Metals: Bullish June headline US CPI was reported at 9.1% yoy, continuing the streak of rising prices. The Fed will need to aggressively hike rates to bring price levels lower, raising the risk of plunging the US into a recession. Recession fears will reduce long-term bond yields and should support gold prices. While high inflation is good for gold, the yellow metal saw investment outflows during May and June, as investors opt for the USD as a safe-haven asset. Ags/Softs: Neutral Food prices fell for the third straight month in June, but still are near historic highs following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.6 Wheat prices fell by 5.7% in June but was still higher by 48.5% compared to 2021 (Chart 5).7 This might be down to recession fears, or, more likely, due to better crop conditions, seasonal availability from new harvests in the northern hemisphere, and more exports from Russia. The UN’s FAO warned factors that drove global prices higher still persist. Russia is expected to harvest one of its largest wheat crops since the fall of the Soviet Union.8 According to the 2022/23 USDA outlook, there will be less supplies and consumption, higher exports and stocks.9 Chart 4 Russia Pulls Oil, Gas Supply Strings Russia Pulls Oil, Gas Supply Strings Chart 5 Wheat Price Level Going Down Wheat Price Level Going Down   Footnotes 1     Please see Citigroup says oil prices could tumble to $65 by the end of the year if a recession whacks demand, published by businessinsider.com on July 5, 2022, and Oil could hit $380 if Russia slashes output over price cap, J.P.Morgan says, published by reuters.com on July 4, 2022. 2     Please see Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals published on July 7, 2022. 3    Please see Russia sees extra $4.5 billion in July budget revenue on higher oil prices published by reuters.com on July 5, 2022. 4    Please see Oil, Natgas Prices Set To Surge, which we published on May 19, 2022.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 5    Please see Japan and South Korea's Attendance at the Upcoming NATO Summit Could Worsen Global Tensions, published by time.com on June 16, 2022. 6    Please see Global food prices may be falling, but economist warns Asia’s food costs could still soar published by CNBC on July 11, 2022. 7     Please see Wheat, Corn Prices Tempered- Easing Global Food Cost Concerns published by University of Illinois on July 1, 2022 . 8    Please see Dollar rises to 20-year highs, sends grains lower published by FarmProgress on July 12, 2022. 9    Please see Grain: World Market and Trade published by USDA on July 12, 2022.   Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed in 2022

In this <i>Strategy Outlook</i>, we present the major investment themes and views we see playing out for the rest of the year and beyond.

Executive Summary Long-Term Contracts Needed To Increase LNG Supply EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels The EU will have to reverse course and execute long-term contracts with natural gas producers, LNG shippers and pipeline operators to incentivize production of supplies needed to contain energy prices. Long-term contracting will offer the EU an opportunity to address political and economic fragmentation risks via joint taxation policies.  This would transform state-level risks via-a-vis energy and military security into joint-and-several obligations. The G7’s plan to cap Russian oil prices will be DOA.  The most oil import-dependent EM economies – China and India – will find deeply discounted crude irresistible. Hydrocarbon producers and refiners will increase investments in carbon-capture and storage technology, to maintain their new-found advantage as secure energy sources.  Additional subsidies and funding for this technology will be forthcoming. Bottom Line: The hard realities of military conflict and a lack of investment in production and refining will force governments to incentivize substantial investments in hydrocarbons – particularly natural gas and LNG infrastructure – to address global energy scarcity during a time of war.  We remain long oil and gas exposures via the COMT ETF, and long equity refining and services exposures via the CRAK and IEZ ETFs.  We will re-establish our producer-oriented XOP ETF position if prompt Brent futures trade down to $105/bbl in the front month.  We also remain tactically long Brent and eurozone natgas futures and options. Feature The G7 last opined on liquified natural gas (LNG) supply in May, and as was the case this week, it left even casual observers uncertain as to what it is seeking to achieve: It advocated for a halt to further investments in fossil-fuel projects and, at the same time, called for higher LNG supplies to be provided for the EU states.1  The EU faces daunting energy security and supply constraints.2 A deepening energy scarcity will, we expect, push the EU into recession later this year, as natural-gas rationing is invoked to ensure there are sufficient supplies to meet human needs this winter.  Natgas scarcity will force the EU to reverse course on its renewable-energy transition in the medium term and prioritize fossil-fuel investments, in our view.  Long-term contracting with LNG suppliers will be required to incentivize needed investment in production and transportation to replace Russian gas imports.  Such contracting is a necessity for hydrocarbon producers, given governments’ continued calls for no additional fossil-fuel investment.  Quicksilver shifts in policy are a continuing source of uncertainty for investors and energy-supply firms. Over time, the EU will have to replace close to 7 Tcf/yr of Russian gas imports (Chart 1, middle panel).  This will propel the EU into the ranks of the world’s largest LNG importers (Chart 2).  Chart 1EU Needs To Replace ~ 7 Tcf/yr Of LNG EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels Chart 2EU Will Become A World-Class LNG Importer EU Will Become A World-Class LNG Importer EU Will Become A World-Class LNG Importer Chart 3Long-Term Contracts Needed To Increase LNG Supply EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels Given the length of contracts typically executed with LNG exporters – in excess of 20-plus years – EU governments will be compelled to allow firms and member states to sign long-term contracts for these supplies.  EU governments also will be required to begin planning for and developing LNG importing infrastructure, as these supplies become available over the next 3-5 years. In the meantime, LNG prices will remain under pressure as competition heats up globally ahead of the coming winter (Chart 3). G7 Price-Cap Scheme Will Be DOA The G7’s scheme to impose a price cap on Russian oil exports will be DOA as soon as details are presented.  This is because the world’s largest oil import-dependent economies – China and India – not only have long trading histories with Russia, but they also operate their own oil-transport fleets that can circumvent insurance-related obstacles imposed by the US and the UK.  China and India already find discounted Russian oil irresistible, and are unlikely to acquiesce to US demands for a price cap.  China imports 75% of its 15.5mm b/d of oil consumption, while India imports ~ 85% of the 5mm b/d of oil it consumes.  Even if oil importers taking Russia's exports going to the EU were to sign on to a price-cap scheme, Russia could always unilaterally cut its oil and condensate production by 20-30% and force Brent prices sharply higher for remaining contract holders. This would almost surely lead to higher prices – above $140/bbl, based on our earlier estimates – and raise Russia’s net export proceeds in the process, since the G7 does not want all of Russia's oil taken off the market.3 Government Interventions Exacerbate Scarcity Governments of states with contestable elections increasingly are intervening – or attempting to do so – in global energy markets and imposing often-contradictory policies that nominally favor consumers at the expense of energy producers.  This almost always is counter-productive: Price caps intended to soften the blow of higher-cost electricity and hydrocarbons discourages the necessary conservation of scarce resources.  So-called windfall profits taxes discourage the investment required to address supply scarcity.  Higher demand and lower supply does not lead to lower prices.  Even grander schemes – e.g., the monopsony cartels floated by G7 member states like the US and EU, along with China – almost surely would reduce the profitability of developing and marketing new energy supplies, which also would exacerbate scarcity of supply by discouraging investment. These quick ad hoc fixes work at cross purposes in solving the problem of global energy scarcity.  While they are in keeping with a penchant of governments to demonstrate they are addressing voters’ concerns, such policies mistake a quick response for long-term solutions. Investment Implications The EU will, in our opinion, be forced to reverse course and sign long-term LNG supply contracts to replace Russian natural gas imports.  This will not derail its renewable-energy transition strategy, but it will significantly delay it.  We remain long oil and gas exposures via the S&P GSCI and COMT ETF, and long equity refining and services exposures via the CRAK and IEZ ETFs.  We will re-establish our producer-focused XOP ETF position if Brent trades down to $105/bbl in the front month.  We also remain tactically long Brent and eurozone natgas futures and options (see p. 7 below). Housekeeping Notes We were stopped out of our long S&P GSCI position with a gain of 64%.  We are getting long again at the close. We also were stopped out of our long 4Q22 $120/bbl Brent calls with a 16% return. Separately, there will be no Commodity Round-Up in this week’s publication.  We are broadcasting our Commodity Round-Up today at 9 a.m. EDT.    Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     Please see The G7 wants to dump natural gas … but not yet published by politico.com 27 May 2022.  The report notes, “The G7 called for an end to international investments in fossil fuels by the end of this year and slammed private finance for continuing to back dirty energy — but left a big out for EU countries desperate to replace Russian gas.  ‘We acknowledge that investment in [the liquefied natural gas] sector is necessary in response to the current crisis, in a manner consistent with our climate objectives and without creating lock-in effects,’ the ministers said.” 2     Please see One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy, published 26 May 2022.  This report delves into the EU’s post-Cold War foreign policy.  For three decades, EU foreign policy largely was set by Germany, the organization's most powerful economy.  Successive generations of German politicians championed the idea that the West could bring the former Soviet Union – and later Russia – into the modern world of global trade through Ostpolitik, which had, at its core, a belief in the power of trade to effect political and economic change.  This policy is kaput. 3    Please see Higher Gasoline, Diesel Prices Ahead, which we published 2 June 2022.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed in 2022

Executive Summary There has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse. In a recession, the massive destruction of oil demand always overwhelms a tight supply. Across the last six recessions, the median collapse in the oil price was -60 percent, with the best case being -30 percent, and the worst case being -75 percent. Hence, in the coming recession, the oil price is likely headed to $55, with the best case being $85, and the worst case being $30. Investors should short oil, or short oil versus copper. Equity investors should underweight the oil sector versus basic resources and/or industrials and/or banks, and underweight oil-heavy equity markets such as Norway. Fractal trading watchlist: Oil versus industrials, and oil versus banks. Oil Didn’t Get The ‘Everything Sell-Off’ Memo Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo Bottom Line: There has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse, and this time will be no different. Feature We have just witnessed a rare star-alignment. The near-perfect line up of Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn in the heavens is a spectacular sight for the early birds who can star gaze through clear skies. And it is a rare event, which last happened in 2004. But investors have just witnessed an even rarer star-alignment. The ‘everything sell-off’ in stocks, bonds, inflation-protected bonds, industrial metals, and gold during the second quarter has happened in only one other calendar quarter out of almost 200. Making it a ‘1 in a 100’ event, which last happened way back in 1981 (Chart I-1 and Chart I-2). Chart I-1The ‘Everything Sell-Off’ In 2022… Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo Chart I-2...Last Happened In 1981 ...Last Happened In 1981 ...Last Happened In 1981 As we detailed in our previous reports Markets Echo 1981 When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession and More On 2022-23 = 1981-82 And The Danger Ahead, a once-in-a-generation conjugation connects the ‘1 in a 100’ everything sell-offs in 1981 and 2022. The conjugation is inflation fears, exacerbated by a major war between commodity producing neighbours, and countered by aggressive rate hikes, morph into recession fears. The 1981-82 episode is an excellent blueprint for market action through 2022-23. This makes the 1981-82 episode an excellent blueprint for market action through 2022-23, and we refer readers to the previous reports for the implications for stocks, bonds, equity sectors, and currencies. Oil Didn’t Get The ‘Everything Sell-Off’ Memo But one major investment didn’t get the ‘everything sell-off’ memo. That major investment is crude oil. Even within the commodity space, oil is the outlier. In the second quarter, industrial commodity prices have collapsed: copper, -20 percent; iron ore -25 percent; tin, -40 percent; and lumber, -40 percent. Yet the crude oil price is up, +7 percent, and the obvious explanation is the Russia/Ukraine war (Chart I-3). Chart I-3Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo The Russia/Ukraine war is an important part of the 2022/1981 once-in-a-generation conjugation. In 1981, just as now, the full-scale invasion-led war between two major commodity producing neighbours – Iraq and Iran – disrupted commodity supplies, and thereby added fuel to an already red-hot inflationary fire. When Russia invaded Ukraine earlier this year, the oil price surged by 25 percent. Remarkably, when Iraq invaded Iran in late 1980, the oil price also surged by 25 percent. But by mid-1981, with the global economy slowing, the oil price had given back those gains. Then, as the economy entered recession in early 1982, the oil price slumped to 15 percent below its pre-war level. If 2022-23 follows this blueprint, it would imply the oil price falling to $85/barrel (Chart I-4). Chart I-4If Oil Follows The 1981-82 Blueprint, It Will Tumble To $85 If Oil Follows The 1981-82 Blueprint, It Will Tumble To $85 If Oil Follows The 1981-82 Blueprint, It Will Tumble To $85 There Has Never Been A Recession In Which The Oil Price Did Not Collapse Everybody knows the narrative for the oil price surge this year. In what is putatively a very tight market, the embargo of Russian oil has removed enough supply to put significant upward pressure on the price. The trouble with this story is that Russian oil will find a buyer, even if it requires a discount. Moreover, with the major buyers being China and India, it will be politically and physically impossible to police secondary sanctions. The bottom line is that Russian oil will find its way into the market. There has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse. But the bigger problem will come from the demand side of the equation when the global economy enters, or even just flirts with, a recession. Put simply, because of massive demand destruction, there has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse (Chart I-5 - Chart I-10). Chart I-5In The Early 80s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -30 Percent In The Early 80s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -30 Percent In The Early 80s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -30 Percent Chart I-6In The Early 90s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -60 Percent In The Early 90s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -60 Percent In The Early 90s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -60 Percent Chart I-7In The 2000 Dot Com Bust, Oil Collapsed By ##br##-55 Percent In The 2000 Dot Com Bust, Oil Collapsed By -55 Percent In The 2000 Dot Com Bust, Oil Collapsed By -55 Percent Chart I-8In The 2008 Global Financial Crisis, Oil Collapsed By -75 Percent In The 2008 Global Financial Crisis, Oil Collapsed By -75 Percent In The 2008 Global Financial Crisis, Oil Collapsed By -75 Percent Chart I-9In The 2015 EM Recession, Oil Collapsed By ##br##-60 Percent In The 2015 EM Recession, Oil Collapsed By -60 Percent In The 2015 EM Recession, Oil Collapsed By -60 Percent Chart I-10In The 2020 Pandemic, Oil Collapsed By ##br##-75 Percent In The 2020 Pandemic, Oil Collapsed By -75 Percent In The 2020 Pandemic, Oil Collapsed By -75 Percent Furthermore, as we explained in Oil Is The Accessory To The Murder, a preceding surge in the oil price is a remarkably consistent ‘straw that breaks the camel’s back’, tipping an already fragile economy over the brink into recession. Meaning that the oil price ends up in a symmetrical undershoot to its preceding overshoot. The result being a massive drawdown in the oil price in every modern era recession or sharp slowdown. Specifically: Early 80s recession: -30 percent Early 90s recession: -60 percent 2000 dot com bust: -55 percent 2008 global financial crisis: -75 percent 2015 EM recession: -60 percent 2020 pandemic: -75 percent What about the 1970s episode – isn’t this the counterexample in which the oil price remained stubbornly high despite a recession? No, even in the 1974 recession, the oil price fell by -25 percent.  Moreover, the commonly cited explanation for the elevated nominal price of oil through the 70s is a misreading of history. The popular narrative blames OPEC supply cutbacks related to geopolitical events – especially the US support for Israel in the Arab-Israel war of October 1973.  As neat and popular as this narrative is, it ignores the real culprit: the collapse in August 1971 of the Bretton Woods ‘pseudo gold standard’, which severed the fixed link between the US dollar and quantities of commodities. To maintain the real value of oil, OPEC countries were raising the price of crude oil just to play catch up. Meaning that while geopolitical events may have influenced the precise timing and magnitude of price hikes, OPEC countries were just ‘staying even’ with the collapsing real value of the US dollar, in which oil was priced. In terms of gold, in which oil was effectively priced before 1971, the oil price was no higher in 1980 than in 1971! (Chart I-11) Chart I-11Priced In Gold, The Oil Price Was No Higher In 1980 Than in 1971! Priced In Gold, The Oil Price Was No Higher In 1980 Than in 1971! Priced In Gold, The Oil Price Was No Higher In 1980 Than in 1971! Shorting Oil And Oil Plays Will Be Very Rewarding For Patient Investors The four most dangerous words in investment are ‘this time is different’. Today, the oil bulls insist that this time really is different because of an unprecedented structural underinvestment in fossil fuel extraction. Leaving the precariously tight oil market vulnerable to the slightest uptick in demand, or downtick in supply. Maybe. But to reiterate, in a recession, the massive destruction of oil demand always overwhelms a tight supply. In this important regard, this time will not be different. Taking the median drawdown of the last six recessions of 60 percent, and applying it to the post-invasion peak of $130, it implies that, in the coming recession, oil will plunge to $55. In a recession, the massive destruction of oil demand always overwhelms a tight supply. Of course, this is the average of a range of recession outcomes, with the best case being $85 and the worst case being $30. Still, this means that patient investors who short oil can look forward to substantial gains. Alternatively, those who want a hedged position should short oil versus copper – especially as oil versus copper is now at the top of its 25-year trading channel (Chart I-12). Chart I-12Oil Versus Copper Is At The Top Of Its 25-Year Trading Channel Oil Versus Copper Is At The Top Of Its 25-Year Trading Channel Oil Versus Copper Is At The Top Of Its 25-Year Trading Channel Equity investors should underweight the oil sector versus basic resources (Chart I-13) and/or versus industrials and/or versus banks, and underweight oil-heavy stock markets such as Norway (Chart I-14). Chart I-13Underweight Oil Versus Basic Resources Underweight Oil Versus Basic Resources Underweight Oil Versus Basic Resources Chart I-14Underweight Oil-Heavy Stock Markets Such As Norway Underweight Oil-Heavy Stock Markets Such As Norway Underweight Oil-Heavy Stock Markets Such As Norway Suffice to say, these are all correlated trades. They will all work, or they will all not work. But to repeat, this time is never different. Fractal Trading Watchlist Confirming the fundamental arguments to underweight oil plays, the spectacular recent outperformance of oil equities versus both industrials and banks has reached the point of fragility on its 260-day fractal structures that has reliably signalled previous turning points (Chart I-15). Chart I-15The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Industrials Is Exhausted The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Industrials Is Exhausted The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Industrials Is Exhausted We are adding oil versus banks to our watchlist, with this week’s recommendation being to underweight oil versus industrials, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss of 10 percent, with a maximum holding period of 6 months. Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted Chart 1BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point   Chart 2Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 3CNY/USD At A Potential Turning Point CNY/USD Has Reversed CNY/USD Has Reversed Chart 4US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 5CAD/SEK Is Vulnerable To Reversal CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 6Financials Versus Industrials Has Reversed Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 7The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Ended The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 8The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Has Ended The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 9FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing Chart 10Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Is Ending Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Chart 11The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 12The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 13Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Chart 14German Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal AT REVERSAL AT REVERSAL Chart 15Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal AT REVERSAL AT REVERSAL Chart 16The Strong Downtrend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 17The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 18A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 19Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 20Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 21Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 22Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Ended Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 23USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 24The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 25A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 26GBP/USD At A Potential Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point Chart 27US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 28The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades Why Oil Is Headed To $55 Why Oil Is Headed To $55 Why Oil Is Headed To $55 Why Oil Is Headed To $55 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Executive Summary Russia Squeezes EU Natural Gas Russia Squeezes EU Natural Gas Russia Squeezes EU Natural Gas Major geopolitical shocks tend to coincide with bear markets, so the market is getting closer to pricing this year’s bad news. But investors are not out of the woods yet. Russia is cutting off Europe’s natural gas supply ahead of this winter in retaliation to Europe’s oil embargo. Europe is sliding toward recession. China is reverting to autocratic rule and suffering a cyclical and structural downshift in growth rates. Only after Xi Jinping consolidates power will the ruling party focus exclusively on economic stabilization. The US can afford to take risks with Russia, opening up the possibility of a direct confrontation between the two giants before the US midterm election. A new strategic equilibrium is not yet at hand. Tactical Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GLOBAL DEFENSIVES / CYCLICALS EQUITIES 2022-01-20 18.3% Bottom Line: Maintain a defensive posture in the third quarter but look for opportunities to buy oversold assets with long-term macro and policy tailwinds. Feature 2022 is a year of geopolitics and supply shocks. Global investors should remain defensive at least until the Chinese national party congress and US midterm election have passed. More fundamentally, an equilibrium must be established between Russia and NATO and between the US and Iran. Until then supply shocks will destroy demand. Checking Up On Our Three Key Views For 2022 Our three key views for the year are broadly on track: 1.  China’s Reversion To Autocracy: For ten years now, the fall in Chinese potential economic growth has coincided with a rise in neo-Maoist autocracy and foreign policy assertiveness, leading to capital flight, international tensions, and depressed animal spirits (Chart 1). Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyWill China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Rising incomes provided legitimacy for the Communist Party over the past four decades. Less rapidly rising incomes – and extreme disparities in standards of living – undermine the party and force it to find other sources of public support. Fighting pollution and expanding the social safety net are positives for political stability and potentially for economic productivity. But converting the political system from single-party rule to single-person rule is negative for productivity. Mercantilist trade policy and nationalist security policy are also negative. China’s political crackdown, struggle with Covid-19, waning exports, and deflating property market have led to an abrupt slowdown this year. The government is responding by easing monetary, fiscal, and regulatory policy, though so far with limited effect (Chart 2). Economic policy will not be decisive in the third quarter unless a crash forces the administration to stimulate aggressively. Chart 1China's Slowdown Leads To Maoism, Nationalism China's Slowdown Leads To Maoism, Nationalism China's Slowdown Leads To Maoism, Nationalism ​​​​​​ Chart 2Chinese Policy Easing: Limited Effect So Far Chinese Policy Easing: Limited Effect So Far Chinese Policy Easing: Limited Effect So Far ​​​​​ Chart 3Nascent Rally In Chinese Shares Will Be Dashed Nascent Rally In Chinese Shares Will Be Dashed Nascent Rally In Chinese Shares Will Be Dashed Once General Secretary Xi Jinping secures another five-to-ten years in power at the twentieth national party congress this fall, he will be able to “let 100 flowers bloom,” i.e. ease policy further and focus exclusively on securing the economic recovery in 2023. But policy uncertainty will remain high until then. The party may have to crack down anew to ensure Xi’s power consolidation goes according to plan. China is highly vulnerable to social unrest for both structural and cyclical reasons. The US would jump to slap sanctions on China for human rights abuses. Hence the nascent recovery in Chinese domestic and offshore equities can easily be interrupted until the political reshuffle is over (Chart 3). If China’s economy stabilizes and a recession is avoided, investors will pile into the rally, but over the long run they will still be vulnerable to stranded capital due to Chinese autocracy and US-China cold war. If the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee are stacked with members of Xi’s faction, as one should expect, then the reduction in policy uncertainty will only be temporary. Autocracy will lead to unpredictable and draconian policy measures – and it cannot solve the problem of a shrinking and overly indebted population. If the Communist Party changes course and stacks the Politburo with Xi’s factional rivals, to prevent China from going down the Maoist, Stalinist, and Putinist route, then global financial markets will cheer. But that outcome is unlikely. Hawkish foreign policy means that China will continue to increase its military threats against Taiwan, while not yet invading outright. Beijing has tightened its grip over Tibet, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong since 2008; Taiwan and the South China Sea are the only critical buffer areas that remain to be subjugated. Taiwan’s midterm elections, US midterms, and China’s party congress will keep uncertainty elevated. Taiwan has underperformed global and emerging market equities as the semiconductor boom and shortage has declined (Chart 4). Hong Kong is vulnerable to another outbreak of social unrest and government repression. Quality of life has deteriorated for the native population. Democracy activists are disaffected and prone to radicalization. Singapore will continue to benefit at Hong Kong’s expense (Chart 5). Chart 4Taiwan Equity Relative Performance Peaked Taiwan Equity Relative Performance Peaked Taiwan Equity Relative Performance Peaked ​​​​​​ Chart 5Hong Kong Faces More Troubles Hong Kong Faces More Troubles Hong Kong Faces More Troubles ​​​​​​ Chart 6Japan Undercuts China Japan Undercuts China Japan Undercuts China China and Japan are likely to engage in clashes in the East China Sea. Beijing’s military modernization, nuclear weapons expansion, and technological development pose a threat to Japanese security. The gradual encirclement of Taiwan jeopardizes Japan’s vital sea lines of communication. Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is well positioned to lead the Liberal Democratic Party into the upper house election on July 10 – he does not need to trigger a diplomatic showdown but he would not suffer from it. Meanwhile China is hungry for foreign distractions and unhappy that Japan is reviving its military and depreciating its currency (Chart 6). A Sino-Japanese crisis cannot be ruled out, especially if the Biden administration looks as if it will lose its nerve in containing China. Financial markets would react negatively, depending on the magnitude of the crisis. North Korea is going back to testing ballistic missiles and likely nuclear weapons. It is expanding its doctrine for the use of such weapons. It could take advantage of China’s and America’s domestic politics to stage aggressive provocations. South Korea, which has a hawkish new president who lacks parliamentary support, is strengthening its deterrence with the United States. These efforts could provoke a negative response from the North. Financial markets will only temporarily react to North Korean provocations unless they are serious enough to elicit military threats from Japan or the United States. China would be happy to offer negotiations to distract the Biden administration from Xi’s power grab. South Korean equities will benefit on a relative basis as China adds more stimulus. 2.  America’s Policy Insularity: President Biden’s net approval rating, at -15%, is now worse than President Trump’s in 2018, when the Republicans suffered a beating in midterm elections (Chart 7). Biden is now fighting inflation to try to salvage the elections for his party. That means US foreign policy will be domestically focused and erratic in the third quarter. Aside from “letting” the Federal Reserve hike rates, Biden’s executive options are limited. Pausing the federal gasoline tax requires congressional approval, and yet if he unilaterally orders tax collectors to stand down, the result will be a $10 billion tax cut – a drop in the bucket. Biden is considering waiving some of former President Trump’s tariffs on China, which he can do on his own. But doing so will hurt his standing in Rust Belt swing states without reducing inflation enough to get a payoff at the voting booth – after all, import prices are growing slower from China than elsewhere (Chart 8). He would also give Xi Jinping a last-minute victory over America that would silence Xi’s critics and cement his dictatorship at the critical hour. Chart 7Democrats Face Shellacking In Midterm Elections Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning ​​​​​​ Chart 8Paring Trump Tariffs Won't Reduce Inflation Much Paring Trump Tariffs Won't Reduce Inflation Much Paring Trump Tariffs Won't Reduce Inflation Much ​​​​​​ Chart 9Only OPEC Can Help Biden - And Help May Come Late Only OPEC Can Help Biden - And Help May Come Late Only OPEC Can Help Biden - And Help May Come Late Biden is offering to lift sanctions on Iran, which would free up 1.3 million barrels of oil per day. But Iran is not being forced to freeze its nuclear program by weak oil prices or Russian and Chinese pressure – quite the opposite. If Biden eases sanctions anyway, prices at the pump may not fall enough to win votes. Hence Biden is traveling to Saudi Arabia to make amends with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. OPEC’s interest lies in producing enough oil to prevent a global recession, not in flooding the market on Biden’s whims to rescue the Democratic Party. Saudi and Emirati production may come but it may not come early in the third quarter. Lifting sanctions on Venezuela is a joke and Libya recently collapsed again (Chart 9). Even in dealing with Russia the Biden administration will exhibit an insular perspective. The US is not immediately threatened, like Europe, so it can afford to take risks, such as selling Ukraine advanced and long-range weapons and providing intelligence used to sink Russian ships. If Russia reacts negatively, a direct US-Russia confrontation will generate a rally around the flag that would help the Democrats, as it did under President John F. Kennedy in 1962 – one of the rare years in which the ruling party minimized its midterm election losses (Chart 10). The Cuban Missile Crisis counted more with voters than the earlier stock market slide. 3.  Petro-States’ Geopolitical Leverage: Oil-producing states have immense geopolitical leverage this year thanks to the commodity cycle. Russia will not be forced to conclude its assault on Ukraine until global energy prices collapse, as occurred in 2014. In fact Russia’s leverage over Europe will be greatly reduced in the coming years since Europe is diversifying away from Russian energy exports. Hence Moscow is cutting natural gas flows to Europe today while it still can (Chart 11). Chart 10Biden Can Afford To Take Risks With Russia Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning ​​​​​​ Chart 11Russia Squeezes EU's Natural Gas Russia Squeezes EU's Natural Gas Russia Squeezes EU's Natural Gas ​​​​​​ Chart 12EU/China Slowdown Will Weigh On World Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning Russia’s objective is to inflict a recession and cause changes in either policy or government in Europe. This will make it easier to conclude a favorable ceasefire in Ukraine. More importantly it will increase the odds that the EU’s 27 members, having suffered the cost of their coal and oil embargo, will fail to agree to a natural gas embargo by 2027 as they intend. Italy, for example, faces an election by June 2023, which could come earlier. The national unity coalition was formed to distribute the EU’s pandemic recovery funds. Now those funds are drying up, the economy is sliding toward recession, and the coalition is cracking. The most popular party is an anti-establishment right-wing party, the Brothers of Italy, which is waiting in the wings and can ally with the populist League, which has some sympathies with Russia. A recession could very easily produce a change in government and a more pragmatic approach to Moscow. The Italian economy is getting squeezed by energy prices and rising interest rates at the same time and cannot withstand the combination very long. A European recession or near-recession will cause further downgrades to global growth, especially when considering the knock-on effects in China, where the slowdown is more pronounced than is likely reported. The US economy is more robust but it will have to be very robust indeed to withstand a recession in Europe and growth recession in China (Chart 12). Russia does not have to retaliate against Finland and Sweden joining NATO until Turkey clears the path for them to join, which may not be until just before the Turkish general election due in June 2023. But imposing a recession on Europe is already retaliation – maybe a government change will produce a new veto against NATO enlargement. Russian retaliation against Lithuania for blocking 50% of its shipments to the Kaliningrad exclave is also forthcoming – unless Lithuania effectively stops enforcing the EU’s sanctions on Russian resources. Russia cannot wage a full-scale attack on the Baltic states without triggering direct hostilities with NATO since they are members of NATO. But it can retaliate in other ways. In a negative scenario Moscow could stage a small “accidental” attack against Lithuania to test NATO. But that would force Biden to uphold his pledge to defend “every inch” of NATO territory. Biden would probably do so by staging a proportionate military response or coordinating with an ally to do it. The target would be the Russian origin of attack or comparable assets in the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, Ukraine, Belarus, or elsewhere. The result would be a dangerous escalation. Russia could also opt for cyber-attacks or economic warfare – such as squeezing Europe’s natural gas supply further. Ultimately Russia can afford to take greater risks than the US over Kaliningrad, other territories, and its periphery more broadly. That is the difference between Kennedy and Biden – the confrontation is not over Cuba. Russia is also likely to take a page out of Josef Stalin’s playbook and open a new front – not so much in Nicaragua as in the Middle East and North Africa. The US betrayal of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran opens the opportunity for Russia to strengthen cooperation with Iran, stir up the Iranians’ courage, sell them weapons, and generate a security crisis in the Middle East. The US military would be distracted keeping peace in the Persian Gulf while the Europeans would lose their long-term energy alternative to Russia – and energy prices would rise. The Iranians – who also have leverage during a time of high oil prices – are not inclined to freeze their nuclear program. That would be to trade their long-term regime survival for economic benefits that the next American president can revoke unilaterally. Bottom Line: Xi Jinping is converting China back into an autocracy, the Biden administration lacks options and is willing to have a showdown with Russia, and the Putin administration is trying to inflict a European recession and political upheaval. Stay defensive. Checking Up On Our Strategic Themes For The 2020s As for our long-term themes, the following points are relevant after what we have learned in the second quarter: 1.  Great Power Rivalry: The war in Ukraine has reminded investors of the primacy of national security. In an anarchic international system, if a single great nation pursues power to the neglect of its neighbors’ interests, then its neighbors need to pursue power to defend themselves. Before long every nation is out for itself. At least until a new equilibrium is established. For example, Russia’s decision to neutralize Ukraine by force is driving Germany to abandon its formerly liberal policy of energy cooperation in order to reduce Russia’s energy revenues and avoid feeding its military ambitions. Russia in turn is reducing natural gas exports to weaken Europe’s economy this winter. Germany will re-arm, Finland and Sweden will eventually join NATO, and Russia will underscore its red line against NATO bases or forces in Finland and Sweden. If this red line is violated then a larger war could ensue. Chart 13China Will Shift To Russian Energy China Will Shift To Russian Energy China Will Shift To Russian Energy Until Russia and NATO come to a new understanding, neither Europe nor Russia can be secure. Meanwhile China cannot reject Russia’s turn to the east. China believes it may need to use force to prevent Taiwan independence at some point, so it must prepare for the US and its allies to treat it the same way that they have treated Russia. It must secure energy supply from Russia, Central Asia, and the Middle East via land routes that the US navy cannot blockade (Chart 13). Beijing must also diversify away from the US dollar, lest the Treasury Department freeze its foreign exchange reserves like it did Russia’s. Global investors will see diversification as a sign of China’s exit from the international order and preparation for conflict, which is negative for its economic future. However, the Russo-Chinese alliance presents a historic threat to the US’s security, coming close to the geopolitical nightmare of a unified Eurasia. The US is bound to oppose this development, whether coherently or not, and whether alone or in concert with its allies. After all, the US cannot offer credible security guarantees to negotiate a détente with China or Iran because its domestic divisions are so extreme that its foreign policy can change overnight. Other powers cannot be sure that the US will not suffer a radical domestic policy change or revolution that leads to belligerent foreign policy. Insecurity will drive the US and China apart rather than bringing them together. For example, Russia’s difficulties in Ukraine will encourage Chinese strategists to go back to the drawing board to adjust their plans for military contingencies in Taiwan. But the American lesson from Ukraine is to increase deterrence in Taiwan. That will provoke China and encourage the belief that China cannot wait forever to resolve the Taiwan problem. Until there is a strategic understanding between Russia and NATO, and the US and China, the world will remain in a painful and dangerous transitional phase – a multipolar disequilibrium. Chart 14Hypo-Globalization: Globalizing Less Than Potential Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning 2.  Hypo-Globalization: If national security rises to the fore, then economics becomes a tool of state power. Mercantilism becomes the basis of globalization rather than free market liberalism. Hypo-globalization is the result. The term is fitting because the trade intensity of global growth is not yet in a total free fall (i.e. de-globalization) but merely dropping off from its peaks during the phase of “hyper-globalization” in the 1990s and early 2000s (Chart 14). Hypo-globalization is probably a structural rather than cyclical phenomenon. The EU cannot re-engage with Russia and ease sanctions without rehabilitating Russia’s economy and hence its military capacity – which could enable Russia to attack Europe again. The US and China can try to re-engage but they will fail. Russo-Chinese alliance ensures that the US would be enriching not one but both of its greatest strategic rivals if it reopened its doors to Chinese technology acquisition and intellectual property theft. Iran will see its security in alliance with Russia and China. China has an incentive to develop Iran’s economy so as not to depend solely on Russia and Central Asia. Russia has an incentive to develop Iran’s military capacity so as to deprive Europe of an energy alternative. Both Russia and China wish to deprive the US of strategic hegemony in the Middle East. By contrast the US and EU cannot offer ironclad security guarantees to Iran because of its nuclear ambitions and America’s occasional belligerence. Thus the world can see expanding Russian and Chinese economic integration with Eurasia, and expanding American and European integration with various regions, but it cannot see further European integration with Russia or American integration with China. And ultimately Europe and China will be forced to sever links (Chart 15). Globalization will not cease – it is a multi-millennial trend – but it will slow down. It will be subordinated to national security and mercantilist economic theory. 3.  Populism/Nationalism: In theory, domestic instability can cause introversion or extroversion. But in practice we are seeing extroversion, which is dangerous for global stability (Chart 16). Chart 15Global Economic Disintegration Global Economic Disintegration Global Economic Disintegration ​​​​​​ Chart 16Internal Sources Of Nationalism Internal Sources Of Nationalism Internal Sources Of Nationalism ​​​​​​ Russia’s invasion of Ukraine derived from domestic Russian instability – and instability across the former Soviet space, including Belarus, which the Kremlin feared could suffer a color revolution after the rigged election and mass protests of 2020-21. The reason the northern European countries are rapidly revising their national defense and foreign policies to counter Russia is because they perceive that the threat to their security is driven by factors within the former Soviet sphere that they cannot easily remove. These factors will get worse as a result of the Ukraine war. Russian aggression still poses the risk of spilling out of Ukraine’s borders. China’s Maoist nostalgia and return to autocratic government is also about nationalism. The end of the rapid growth phase of industrialization is giving way to the Asian scourge: debt-deflation. The Communist Party is trying to orchestrate a great leap forward into the next phase of development. But in case that leap fails like the last one, Beijing is promoting “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” and blaming the rest of the world for excluding and containing China. Taiwan, unfortunately, is the last relic of China’s past humiliation at the hands of western imperialists. China will also seek to control the strategic approach to Taiwan, i.e. the South China Sea. China’s claim that the Taiwan Strait is sovereign sea, not international waters, will force the American navy to assert freedom of passage. American efforts to upgrade Taiwan relations and increase deterrence will be perceived as neo-imperialism. The United States, for its part, could also see nationalism convert into international aggression. The US is veering on the brink of a miniature civil war as nationalist forces in the interior of the country struggle with the political establishment in the coastal states. Polarization has abated since 2020, as stagflation has discredited the Democrats. But it is now likely to rebound, making congressional gridlock all but inevitable. A Republican-controlled House will find a reason to impeach President Biden in 2023-24, in hopes of undermining his party and reclaiming the presidency. Another hotly contested election is possible, or worse, a full-blown constitutional crisis. American institutions proved impervious to the attempt of former President Trump and his followers to disrupt the certification of the Electoral College vote. However, security forces will be much more aggressive against rebellions of whatever stripe in future, which could lead to episodes in which social unrest is aggravated by police repression. If the GOP retakes the White House – especially if it is a second-term Trump presidency with a vendetta against political enemies and nothing to lose – then the US will return to aggressive foreign policy, whether directed at China or Iran or both. In short, polarization has contaminated foreign policy such that the most powerful country in the world cannot lead with a steady hand. Over the long run polarization will decline in the face of common foreign enemies but for now the trend vitiates global stability. Chart 17Germany And Japan Rearming Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning It goes without saying that nationalism is also an active force in Iran, where 83-year-old Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is attempting to ensure the survival of his regime in the face of youthful social unrest and an unclear succession process. If Khamenei takes advantage of the commodity cycle, and American and Israeli disarray, he can make a mad dash for the bomb and try to achieve regime security. But if he does so then nationalism will betray him, since Israel and/or the US are willing to conduct air strikes to uphold the red line against nuclear weaponization. If any more proof of global nationalism is needed, look no further than Germany and Japan, the principal aggressors of World War II. Their pacifist foreign policies have served as the linchpins of the post-war international order. Now they are both pursuing rearmament and a more proactive foreign policy (Chart 17). Nationalism may be very nascent in Germany but it has clearly made a comeback in Japan, which exacerbates China’s fears of containment. The rise of nationalism in India is widely known and reinforces the trend. Bottom Line: Great power rivalry is intensifying because of Russia’s conflict with the West and China’s inability to reject Russia. Hypo-globalization is the result since EU-Russia and US-China economic integration cannot easily be mended in the context of great power struggle. Domestic instability in Russia, China, and the US is leading to nationalism and aggressive foreign policy, as leaders find themselves unwilling or unable to stabilize domestic politics through productive economic pursuits. Investment Takeaways BCA has shifted its House View to a neutral asset allocation stance on equities relative to bonds (Chart 18). Chart 18BCA House View: Neutral Stocks Versus Bonds BCA House View: Neutral Stocks Versus Bonds BCA House View: Neutral Stocks Versus Bonds Geopolitical Strategy remains defensively positioned, favoring defensive markets and sectors, albeit with some exceptions that reflect our long-term views. Tactically stay long US 10-year Treasuries, large caps versus small caps, and defensives versus cyclicals. Stay long Mexico and short the UAE (Chart 19). Strategically stay long gold, US equities relative to global, and aerospace/defense sectors (Chart 20). Among currencies favor the USD, EUR, JPY, and GBP. Chart 19Stay Defensive In Q3 2022 Stay Defensive In Q3 2022 Stay Defensive In Q3 2022 ​​​​​​ Chart 20Stick To Long-Term Geopolitical Trades Stick To Long-Term Geopolitical Trades Stick To Long-Term Geopolitical Trades ​​​​​​ Chart 21Favor Semiconductors But Not Taiwan Favor Semiconductors But Not Taiwan Favor Semiconductors But Not Taiwan ​​​​​ Chart 22Indian Tech Will Rebound Amid China's Geopolitical Risks Indian Tech Will Rebound Amid China's Geopolitical Risks Indian Tech Will Rebound Amid China's Geopolitical Risks ​​​​​ Chart 23Overweight ASEAN Overweight ASEAN Overweight ASEAN Go long US semiconductors and semi equipment versus Taiwan broad market (Chart 21). While we correctly called the peak in Taiwanese stocks relative to global and EM equities, our long Korea / short Taiwan trade was the wrong way to articulate this view and remains deeply in the red. Similarly our attempt to double down on Indian tech versus Chinese tech was ill-timed. China eased tech regulations sooner than we expected. However, the long-term profile of the trade is still attractive and Chinese tech will still suffer from excessive government and foreign interference (Chart 22). Go long Singapore over Hong Kong, as Asian financial leadership continues to rotate (see Chart 5 above). Stay long ASEAN among emerging markets. We will also put Malaysia on upgrade watch, given recent Malaysian equity outperformance on the back of Chinese stimulus and growing western interest in alternatives to China (Chart 23).     Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix