Join Us at the 2023 World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida!

? Dates: November 17, 18, and 19 ? Location: Orlando, Florida, USA (or tune in from home with our virtual ticket options)

Are you ready to unlock the future of economics and finance? Prepare for an unforgettable World Economic Conference experience in sunny Orlando, Florida! This premier event is your gateway to insights, networking, and valuable resources that will supercharge your understanding of the global economy.

?️ What’s Included for In-Person Attendees:

1. Event Admission: Enjoy reserved seating assigned based on the order of ticket sales, ensuring you have a prime view of every presentation.
2. Presentation Slides: Gain access to the presentation slides from all speakers, allowing you to delve deeper into the topics discussed.
3. Video Recording: Can’t make it to a session? No worries! You’ll receive access to video recordings of all conference presentations, so you can catch up at your convenience.
4. WEC Event App: Connect with the conference on a whole new level. Access presentation slides, bonus reports, recordings, and more via the official WEC Event App.
5. Bonus Conference Materials: Get a package of bonus conference-related materials, including exclusive bonus reports and videos (as provided by Martin Armstrong).
6. Morning Information Sessions: Don’t miss out on important morning information sessions, screened on-site in the meeting room on Saturday and Sunday.
7. Networking Opportunities: Exclusive access to the Event App Networking Feature allows you to connect with fellow attendees, both in-person and virtual, fostering valuable professional relationships.
8. Culinary Delights: Savor delicious breakfast and lunch on Saturday and Sunday, prepared to keep you energized throughout the day.
9. Cocktail Reception: Kick off the conference in style at our Friday evening cocktail reception. Meet and mingle with fellow attendees while enjoying refreshing drinks.
10. Swag Bag: As a token of our appreciation, each in-person attendee will receive a swag bag filled with goodies, including an Armstrong Economics notebook, pen, and an event collector’s mug!

Unable to travel? We also have two different ticket options for those wishing to attend virtually! 

Don’t miss this opportunity to be part of a global gathering of economic and financial minds. Secure your spot at the World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida, and gain the knowledge, connections, and resources you need to thrive in the world of finance and economics.

Space is limited, so act now and reserve your seat! Visit our Events page to register and join us in sunny Orlando this November.

Now available at all major retailers!

The eBook will be available shortly.

The second edition of “The Plot to Seize Russia – The Untold History” is now available for purchase in paperback and hardcover on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. The ebook will be available shortly.

Book description:

“Take care of Russia,” Boris Yeltsin said as he departed his presidency in August 1999. These words were directed at current Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Yeltsin specifically picked Putin as his predecessor to prevent the takeover of Russia.

So, who was Yeltsin warning against? Newly declassified documents from the Clinton Administration prove that there was a plot to rig the Russian election of 2000. These never-before-seen documents confirm numerous attempts to implement pro-Western policies using the Russian oligarchy headed by Boris Berezovsky.

On the other side were the communists who desired a return to the glory days of the Soviet Union. As one of the largest international hedge fund managers, author Martin Armstrong found himself in the middle of perhaps the greatest espionage, or attempt at a regime change for Russia, in modern history.

The Plot to Seize Russia pulls back the curtain to expose the most extraordinary attempt to seize power in modern history, but with the pen rather than armies. These declassified documents reveal a plot that has altered our thinking about the relations between the United States and Russia. The thirst for power comes seething through every line of these papers that alter our perception of reality, change the course of history, and now threaten us with World War III.

The world seems to have learned absolutely nothing from COVID. Governments destroyed supply chains through lockdowns, shortages spread from semiconductors to automobiles, freight rates exploded, inflation followed, and politicians then acted surprised when consumers could no longer afford the same standard of living. We are now watching another supply-chain shock develop, except this time the source is not government lockdowns. It is WAR, and the Strait of Hormuz is rapidly becoming the choke point through which the economic consequences will spread.

Reuters reported that only SIX vessels passed through the Strait of Hormuz on Monday. That compares with an average of about 11 during the previous 10 days, which is already disastrous when you understand what normal traffic looked like. Before this war, roughly 130 to 140 ships crossed the Strait every day.

The Strait of Hormuz is not merely about crude oil. The Persian Gulf is an artery connecting the global economy to oil, LNG, LPG, refined petroleum products, petrochemicals, fertilizers, aluminum, industrial materials, and countless products whose manufacturing costs depend upon cheap energy. Reuters reported that of the mere six vessels crossing Monday, four commodity vessels entered while only two departed. The outbound ships were carrying liquefied petroleum gas and residual fuels. This is becoming a bottleneck at the very foundation of industrial production.

Oil exports through Hormuz have already been severely reduced. Reuters reported separately that weekly oil exports through the Strait recently fell to about 3 million barrels per day from 4.4 million. Brent briefly touched $90.03 on Tuesday before pulling back, while WTI reached $84.61. Markets are still trading every rumor concerning negotiations between Iran, Oman, and the United States as if politicians can simply announce peace and everything instantly returns to normal. That is not how supply chains function.

Everything moves through transportation. Companies compensate by carrying additional inventory, which ties up capital. Manufacturers pay more for inputs and ultimately pass those costs downstream. Governments will blame corporations for “price gouging” because admitting that geopolitics created the inflation would require admitting responsibility for the policies that helped create the crisis.

Then there is LNG. Europe spent years destroying its relationship with Russia and restructuring its energy supply under the assumption that replacement energy could simply be purchased somewhere else. Qatar became critically important to that strategy, particularly for LNG. Japan and other Asian economies are likewise heavily dependent upon imported energy. If Gulf LNG shipments remain constrained, Europe and Asia will increasingly compete for alternative cargoes, and that competition does not magically create additional natural gas. It simply raises the price.

The economic consequences extend far beyond gasoline. Natural gas is critical to fertilizer production. Petrochemicals feed plastics, packaging, pharmaceuticals, textiles, electronics, construction materials, and manufacturing. Energy is embedded in virtually everything you purchase. A sustained disruption therefore moves through the economy in waves. First energy. Then transportation. Then industrial inputs. Then manufacturing. Then food. Finally consumer prices.

This is why wars become economic events regardless of whether the fighting occurs thousands of miles away. There is also another major problem that few politicians understand. The world never truly rebuilt resilient supply chains after the pandemic. Corporations diversified some suppliers and governments suddenly discovered the phrase “supply-chain security,” but the fundamental structure remains dependent upon enormous volumes of goods moving through a handful of maritime choke points. Hormuz, Bab el-Mandeb, Suez, Malacca, and Panama are arteries of globalization. Disrupt one and costs rise. Disrupt several simultaneously and globalization itself begins to fracture.

Bab el-Mandeb remains operational for now. Reuters reported 25 vessels crossed there Monday, close to its 10-day average of 24. That does not eliminate the danger. The Houthis have already demonstrated that commercial shipping in the Red Sea can become a military target. We therefore have instability surrounding TWO critical maritime corridors connected to the Middle East while the Ukraine war continues disrupting another major source of energy, grain, fertilizer, and commodities.

This is precisely why the War Cycle matters economically. War is never isolated to the battlefield. Politicians calculate military objectives while capital calculates RISK. Capital does not care about patriotic speeches. Insurance companies do not insure vessels because some politician promises everything will be fine. Businesses do not invest billions based upon diplomatic rhetoric. Capital retreats when uncertainty rises, and once it retreats, governments discover that restoring confidence is considerably more difficult than destroying it.

The preliminary U.S.-Iran peace agreement reached in June has already broken down. Iran is demanding sanctions relief and compensation. Trump has responded with demands that Iran itself pay compensation for deaths arising from wars, attacks, and protests. Meanwhile, commercial vessels are disappearing from Hormuz while politicians negotiate over who owes whom money.

The world should be paying attention to the ships, not the speeches. When normal traffic is 130 to 140 vessels per day and suddenly we are counting SIX, something is profoundly wrong. If this persists, inventories will tighten and shortages will emerge unevenly across industries and countries. The public will probably not recognize the connection immediately. They will simply notice that another product takes longer to arrive, another manufacturer announces a surcharge, another utility bill rises, another airline increases fares, another food producer raises prices, and another government statistic claims inflation is somehow under control.

The next supply-chain crisis does not need to resemble 2020. There does not need to be empty toilet-paper aisles for the economic damage to be severe. This version can manifest through energy shortages, freight bottlenecks, fertilizer prices, industrial inputs, shipping delays, insurance costs, and another wave of inflation hitting households that have never recovered from the last one.

Watch Hormuz very carefully. Six ships where there were once 130 to 140 is not normal commerce. It is a warning.

I find these newly released messages because they expose once again how differently these people spoke privately compared with the absolute certainty projected upon the public. Senators Ron Johnson and Rand Paul have now released an initial batch of messages recovered from Anthony Fauci’s government-issued iPhone, reportedly containing more than 34,000 texts. In January 2021, while officials were discussing vaccination during pregnancy, Fauci himself raised a concern about the second dose and wrote that it “theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.” That is Fauci’s language, not mine.

Fauci said the second jab specifically raised fever and what he called a “cytokine storm.” Vivek Murthy responded that Fauci had raised “a really good point” and said it was worth examining. Fauci also noted that more than 10,000 pregnant women had already received the vaccine without apparent “red flags,” but these women and unborn children were used as test subjects. Behind closed doors these officials were discussing uncertainty while the public conversation increasingly became one in which anyone asking difficult questions was treated like an idiot.

Pregnant women deserved to know precisely what government officials knew, what they did not know, and what they were privately debating. In January 2021, nobody possessed five or ten years of pregnancy data for these vaccines because that data could not possibly have existed. Instead, “the science” mandated these vaccines and insisted they were safe and effective for everyone from newborns to unborn babies in utero.

By July 30, 2021, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine were recommending vaccination for pregnant women, with ACOG saying there was evidence of “safe and effective use” during pregnancy. On August 11, the CDC went further and issued a statement literally titled “New CDC Data: COVID-19 Vaccination Safe for Pregnant People,” recommending vaccination during pregnancy after citing surveillance data showing no increased miscarriage signal.

By September, ACOG declared that its message “cannot be stronger or clearer” and described vaccination during pregnancy as “safe and effective.” In January, Fauci was privately discussing a first-trimester miscarriage concern surrounding the second dose; months later, America’s most powerful health organizations insisted upon vaccinations. The public deserved to understand how officials went from one position to the other, but asking questions during the COVID madness era was not permitted. You were to blindly follow “the science” and condemn anyone who dared to inquire.

A federal study was published in April 2021 depicting the miscarriage rate at around 12.6% for pregnant women exposed to the mRNA vaccine. The science decreed that remaining unvaccinated was a far deadlier risk to pregnant women and their unborn children. We know now that the vaccine failed to prevent against infection or transmission. FAR WORSE: the federal study actually documents a MISCARRIAGE RATE OF 82% for women who took the toxin in their second or third trimester. The study showed that the vaccination had the exact same rate of miscarriage as the abortion pill. WOMEN WERE MISLED TO ABORT THEIR CHILDREN. How is there not an absolute uproar over these findings?

Johnson and Paul say these messages are only an initial release from more than 34,000 recovered texts. Paul has already sought answers from Fauci concerning other aspects of the government’s pandemic response, while Johnson says additional records should be examined. Release them ALL. Stop protecting bureaucracies, pharmaceutical companies, politicians, Republicans, Democrats, or anyone else. The government spent years demanding transparency from ordinary Americans while treating its own internal deliberations as something the public had no right to see.

Health agencies across the world reiterated the “SAFE AND EFFECTIVE” messaging and actively targeted pregnant women in marketing campaigns.

The greatest scandal of COVID may ultimately be the destruction of trust. People were told to trust government officials because they possessed information ordinary citizens did not. Now, years later, internal emails and texts continue showing something much more human: officials debating uncertainties, questioning evidence, worrying about risks and sometimes disagreeing among themselves. That is actually how science is supposed to work. What was unacceptable was pretending before the public that such uncertainty barely existed.

People were making decisions about their bodies, pregnancies, livelihoods and families. They had every right to know what their government was discussing. Anything less was an abuse of public trust.

Zelensky is once again complaining that Russia is receiving ballistic missiles from North Korea. The Kyiv Independent reported that he accused Moscow of preparing to receive additional North Korean ballistic missiles, declaring that Russia cannot continue the war without Pyongyang’s assistance. North Korean missiles have reportedly been used in attacks that killed Ukrainian civilians, and that deserves condemnation. But there is an obvious hypocrisy: Ukraine has spent years shopping the world for missiles, ammunition, aircraft, artillery, intelligence, and financing. Apparently, foreign missiles become an unacceptable internationalization of the war only when they are pointed in the opposite direction.

Ukraine has received British Storm Shadow cruise missiles, French SCALP missiles and American ATACMS, and Western restrictions governing their use have progressively changed during the war. Kyiv is now reportedly purchasing another 70 American-made ATACMS missiles from Turkey, subject to U.S. authorization. Zelensky cannot demand additional foreign missiles capable of reaching deeper into Russia and simultaneously act astonished that Russia went shopping for foreign missiles of its own.

The missile does not care what flag was painted on the shipping crate. This is how politicians play the war game. Britain supplies missiles and calls it defense, France supplies missiles and calls it defense, America supplies missiles and calls it defense. North Korea supplies missiles and suddenly everyone screams that the war is being internationalized. Moscow is guilty of precisely the same hypocrisy when it condemns NATO weapons while accepting North Korean missiles and ammunition. Every government has invented a moral exemption for its own escalation while condemning identical behavior from the other side.

Ukraine is developing longer-range weapons and celebrating strikes thousands of kilometers inside Russia while condemning Moscow for expanding its own foreign weapons supply. Support from North Korea can hardly be compared to support from the entirety of NATO.

The civilian deaths are the tragedy buried beneath all this political hypocrisy. Ukrainians die from Russian and North Korean missiles. Russians have also died during Ukrainian long-range attacks and drone strikes. Those civilians did not decide which country should manufacture the weapon that eventually landed near them.

QUESTION: You said Iran is playing 3-D Chess while we are playing checkers. That Iran is also using tactics to disrupt the Israeli and US elections. Can you provide any details to that assessment?

Jeb

ANSWER: There is never anything new under the sun. When the infighting with a country is dominant, an adversary can use that to prevent a unified decision of defense as they argue among themselves. This is the position the United States finds itself in and within Israel, the resistance toward Netanyahu is significant.

This tactic has been adopted through history in military confrontations. I remember I discussed that with the Citadel Military College of South Carolina back in the ’80s when the wanted to teach the ECM to their students. I am not certain if they ever taught this at West Point.

The example is Philip II of Macedon, Alexander the Great’s father. Philip brilliantly used this precise tactic to undermine Athens, which allowed him to conquer Athens and all of Greece. The political infighting in Athens significantly undermined its ability to respond to the rising threat of Macedon.

Iran is employing the same tactic today, knowing that the Democrats will champion their cause simply because Trump is the opposition. Fanning this division prevents any cohesive response to Iran as took place during the conquest of Greece by Philip II.

This polarization of politics within ancient Athens contributed directly to its loss of independence at the Battle of Chaeronea in 338BC. The city’s democratic system, while a source of strength, proved vulnerable to a combination of internal factionalism and the strategic exploitation of these divisions by Philip II of Macedon.

While Philip’s son, Alexander the Great, is famous for his military genius, his approach to conquering the vast Persian Empire was adopting this tactic. He primarily relied on decisive military force, but he was also highly strategic in cultivating political factions within conquered territories to secure his rule.

Alexander’s primary strategy was to decisively seek a military confrontation to shatter the enemy’s power. His goal was to bring the Persian King, Darius III, to battle and defeat him in a way that would make him the uncontested ruler of Asia. By winning decisive victories like those at Granicus and Gaugamela, he made himself the de facto King of Kings, which led to major cities like Babylon and Persepolis surrendering to him without a fight.

Julius Caesar is closely associated with the “divide and conquer” (“divide et impera”) strategy, he adopted in his strategy during the Gallic Wars (58–50 BC). He faced a significant challenge: the Gauls were numerous and possessed formidable cavalry, but they were organized into dozens of small, independent, and often rivalrous tribes. Caesar brilliantly exploited this disunity. He actively sowed discord among the Gallic tribes, forming strategic alliances with some (like the Aedui and Remi) to help him defeat others.

Exploiting the division between Democrat and Republican is the key strategy to drag this out to undermine the Trump Administration and embarass it precisely as they did to Jimmy Carter. This is a well establish strategy to employ against an adversary. This seems to go over the heads of those in media because they are too busy reading the scripts written for them by the Neocons like the Institute Study for [Perpetual] War.

COMMENT: Marty, your report “Is It Time to Nuke Kiev?” really brings things into focus. The U.S. ended World War II by using nuclear weapons on Hiroshima, and Russia might be driven down a similar path—largely because of this current idiot in charge. I’m genuinely stunned that he’s attempting to interfere in Russian elections. What a reckless move.

PA

ANSWER: He is a puppet. The Neocons always think of just taking some action that is in front of their nose without ever thinking through what comes next. Zelensky’s attacks are more likely to ensure that the Hawks gain the majority, and they want Putin to get serious. They have also forced a change in the definition from a “special operation” to “war with Ukraine.” The Neocons think they are righteous and everyone else is evil or inferior. They seem to believe their own propaganda. I have actually heard that if they overthrow Putin, the people will rise up and cheer. They said the same about Iraq and Iran not to mention Vietnam and Afghanistan. The last I checked, I do not recall the people cheering them or giving them their mythical tickertape parade.

While everyone is paying attention to Iran, this is far more serious.

Chinese electric vehicle sales in Europe reached a record high during the first five months of 2026. Chinese brands sold 171,800 battery-electric vehicles across the 18 largest Western European markets, raising their market share from 9.4% to 14.2% in one year. One out of every seven EVs sold in Western Europe now carries a Chinese brand, despite additional EU duties of up to 35.3% on top of the standard 10% automobile tariff.

Brussels claims China is “dumping” state-subsidized vehicles, and there is no question that Beijing supported its EV industry. Yet Europe subsidizes battery factories, charging stations, renewable energy, manufacturers, and the consumers purchasing these cars. Italy’s incentives temporarily reduced the Chinese Leapmotor T03 to as little as €5,000. The difference is that China used industrial policy to build an efficient supply chain, while Europe spent public money creating regulations, mandates, compliance departments, and carbon-accounting schemes.

According to the International Energy Agency, producing a battery-electric vehicle in China costs more than 30% less than producing one in an advanced economy. China manufactured 70% of the world’s electric cars in 2025 and more than 80% of its battery cells. It also controlled approximately 85% of cathode-active-material production and more than 90% of anode-active-material production. Europe is attempting to compete with China while purchasing essential components from the same Chinese supply chain it supposedly intends to defeat.

Chinese battery packs were about 35% cheaper than European packs in 2025. Rhodium Group estimates that manufacturing a small EV in China costs nearly $10,000 less than producing the equivalent vehicle in Germany. Brussels can impose more tariffs and hold another emergency summit, but it cannot legislate away a $10,000 structural disadvantage.

China also embraced lithium-iron-phosphate batteries while Western manufacturers remained committed to more expensive nickel-based chemistry. LFP batteries are cheaper, safer, more durable, and do not require nickel or cobalt. Chinese companies spent years improving the technology until LFP represented more than 55% of global EV battery deployment in 2025. Europe debated environmental standards while China refined the chemistry, built the factories, secured the materials, and lowered the cost.

European manufacturers attempted to protect premium profit margins while Brussels ordered consumers to abandon combustion engines. They believed people would pay €40,000 or €50,000 for an electric car because regulators intended to eliminate the affordable alternative. That arrogance created an opening for BYD, Geely, SAIC, Chery, Leapmotor, and Xpeng.

Chinese manufacturers offered more than 120 electric models in Europe during the first five months of 2026, compared with roughly 100 European models. Around 30% of battery-electric models in China had an entry price below $20,000 in 2025, while fewer than 10% of European BEVs were available below $30,000.

Energy remains the issue Brussels refuses to confront. Europe surrendered cheap Russian energy, closed nuclear plants, imposed carbon taxes, restricted fossil fuels, and attempted to run an industrial economy on intermittent power. China expanded coal, nuclear energy, ports, railways, refining, chemical processing, and battery production. Europe lectures China about emissions while importing Chinese vehicles and batteries manufactured with the dependable energy Europe declared unacceptable.

Brussels responded with tariffs because government punishes consumers when its own policies fail. BYD faces an additional duty of 17%, Geely 18.8%, and SAIC 35.3%. These penalties may buy time, but they do nothing to reduce European production costs, improve software, accelerate development, or rebuild the battery supply chain.

Chinese manufacturers are also moving production into Europe. BYD is establishing manufacturing in Hungary, allowing it to avoid duties on vehicles assembled inside the EU. Chinese companies can bring their production methods, battery relationships, and supply-chain discipline directly into Europe. Brussels will then discover that the problem was never simply where the vehicle was assembled, but the efficiency of the entire industrial system.

Europe cannot allow its automobile industry to disappear. The sector supports millions of jobs and provides expertise essential to steel, chemicals, robotics, semiconductors, machine tools, AI, and defense. Europe is already heavily dependent upon China for solar panels and lithium-ion batteries. Permitting the auto supply chain to vanish would turn Europe into a consumer market living on tourism, taxation, and debt.

The public is not betraying Europe by purchasing an affordable Chinese EV. Brussels betrayed Europe by making European manufacturing uneconomic and then demanding that consumers personally pay the difference. If BYD provides more equipment and technology for thousands less than Volkswagen, a working family has no obligation to impoverish itself to protect executives and politicians who refused to adapt.

China did not steal Europe’s automobile industry. Europe handed it over through arrogance, regulation, and the delusion that government could decree prosperity.

Ukraine’s latest strike inside Russia confirms the direction this war has been moving for some time. Ukraine is no longer limiting its attacks to border regions, occupied territory, or Russian military positions near the front. It is deliberately taking the war into Russia’s economic and industrial interior.

Ukrainian drones struck Nizhnekamsk in the Russian Republic of Tatarstan, roughly 1,200 kilometers or 750 miles from the Ukrainian border. Ukraine’s General Staff said it hit the TANECO oil refinery and started a fire. Russian authorities said the attack killed 13 people, including a child, and injured dozens more. The conflicting reports regarding the number injured range from 39 to 75, and the precise circumstances of the civilian casualties have not been independently established.

TANECO is not some minor roadside operation. It is one of Russia’s most advanced refineries and processed approximately 17 million metric tons of crude during 2024. Nizhnekamsk also contains another refinery and a major petrochemical complex. This was an attack on a critical industrial center that helps supply the Russian economy and, by extension, its war machine. The strike reportedly marked the third attack on the TANECO complex this summer. That alone demonstrates that these are not isolated raids. Ukraine has developed a sustained strategy intended to dismantle Russian refining, transportation, storage, and export capacity one facility at a time.

Ukraine cannot defeat Russia through a conventional war. Russia has more people, more territory, greater industrial depth, and more resources. Kyiv therefore shifted toward economic warfare, using inexpensive long-range drones to attack refineries, pipelines, ports, airfields, factories, warehouses, power systems, and logistics centers deep inside Russia.

In November 2024, I wrote about Ukraine’s use of American and British weapons to strike inside Russia and the corresponding change in Moscow’s nuclear doctrine. The danger was never confined to whether an ATACMS missile crossed an imaginary distance on a map. The strategic change was the decision to make Russia’s interior part of the battlefield.

By May 2026, the Russian government had gone so far as to authorize the central bank, Sberbank, and cash-collection organizations to deploy anti-drone systems and arm their personnel. Banks were effectively being told to defend themselves. This confirmed that the war had spread beyond military installations and into the economic infrastructure of the state.

Russia cannot place a sophisticated air-defense system beside every refinery, pipeline junction, railway yard, warehouse, bank, port, power plant, and factory across 11 time zones. Even Russia does not possess enough defenses to protect a country of that size against thousands of cheap drones approaching from different directions.

The Nizhnekamsk attack also exposes the false argument that deeper strikes will somehow force a quick peace without escalating the conflict. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Russia’s war “will be felt more and more at their own home—in Russia.” That is not the language of de-escalation. It is an admission that Ukraine is attempting to turn Russian civilians against Putin by making the economic and human cost of war increasingly visible inside Russia itself.

The attacks may certainly cause Russia economic damage, but they can also produce the opposite political result. Bombing a population does not automatically cause it to overthrow its government. It can unify the people against the common enemy, as we saw in Iran years ago. Ukraine says it targets infrastructure supporting Russia’s military campaign. Russia says civilians and residential areas were struck. Once drones are flying into cities hundreds or thousands of miles from the front, civilian casualties become inevitable. Russia then uses those deaths to justify still larger attacks on Ukrainian cities.

Ukraine has already demonstrated that nearly no part of Russia can be assumed safe. In February 2026, Ukrainian drones struck the Kaleykino pumping station near Almetyevsk in Tatarstan, also around 1,200 kilometers from the border. Kaleykino is a critical junction within the Druzhba pipeline system, receiving and blending crude from Western Siberia and the Volga region before sending it toward Russian refineries and export routes.

At least six explosions were reported, followed by a major fire. Two storage tanks, each reportedly capable of holding 50,000 metric tons, were ignited. Russia’s pipeline monopoly Transneft subsequently reduced crude intake by approximately 250,000 barrels per day. The station itself has the capacity to handle around one million barrels per day.

The consequences extended beyond Russia. Druzhba remains important to Hungary and Slovakia, two EU and NATO countries that depend heavily on Russian crude because their refinery systems and pipeline connections cannot be replaced with slogans from Brussels. Ukraine’s attacks risk dragging neighboring countries into an energy confrontation with Kyiv and further splitting Europe over continued support for the war.

In June, Ukraine said it attacked the Lazarevo oil-pumping station in Russia’s Kirov region, approximately 1,300 kilometers from Ukrainian-held territory. That station serves the Surgut-Gorky-Polotsk pipeline, which moves Siberian oil westward toward Belarus. Once again, Ukraine was not targeting a tank near the battlefield. It was attacking the circulatory system of Russia’s energy economy.

Then came the July strike on the Omsk refinery in western Siberia, approximately 2,700 kilometers or 1,700 miles from Ukrainian-held territory. Omsk is Russia’s largest refinery, processing around 23 million metric tons annually, equivalent to approximately 460,000 barrels per day. Local Russian authorities confirmed that drones reached the industrial area. Ukraine said the attack caused a fire. Zelensky called it an “important achievement” and declared, “Siberia, too, is now within reach of Ukrainian precision strikes.”

That statement should have awakened every government in Europe. A war that began over eastern Ukraine had developed into attacks on Siberia. Yet NATO continues pretending that each new escalation can be contained and that Russia will never decide it has reached the final red line.

During the same July campaign, Ukraine said it struck the TANECO and TAIF-NK refineries in Tatarstan, the Saratov refinery, a military airfield at Borisoglebsk, a petroleum pumping station in Bashkortostan around 1,450 kilometers from Ukrainian-held territory, and nine oil tankers in the Sea of Azov. Ukrainian operations also reached the Russian Baltic ports of Ust-Luga and Vysotsk, two major oil-export facilities.

On August 6, drones caused a large fire at the Slavneft-YANOS refinery in Yaroslavl, which has an annual processing capacity of roughly 15 million metric tons, or about 300,000 barrels per day. Ukraine also confirmed an attack against the Bashneft-Novoil refinery in Bashkortostan. Days later, a warehouse belonging to Russian online retailer Wildberries burned in Yekaterinburg, more than 2,000 kilometers from the Ukrainian border.

The pattern is unmistakable. Oil production is attacked at the refinery. Transportation is attacked at pumping stations. Exports are attacked at ports and aboard tankers. Aviation is attacked at remote airfields. Industrial supplies are attacked inside factories and warehouses. Ukraine is attempting to impose economic attrition across the entire Russian state.

This strategy did not suddenly appear in 2026. In April 2024, Ukrainian drones struck facilities at Yelabuga and Nizhnekamsk in Tatarstan, more than 1,100 kilometers from Ukraine. Yelabuga housed a facility connected to the production of Shahed-type drones, while Nizhnekamsk contained the TANECO refinery. Those attacks demonstrated that Ukraine was already developing the capacity to penetrate far beyond Russia’s border defenses.

Operation Spiderweb in June 2025 made the strategy undeniable. Ukraine concealed small drones in trucks and prefabricated structures transported across Russia. The drones were launched near Russian airfields rather than flying the entire distance from Ukraine.

The operation targeted strategic aviation bases at Olenya, Belaya, Dyagilevo, and Ivanovo, among others. Ukraine initially claimed that 41 aircraft were hit. American officials offered a lower assessment, estimating that as many as 20 Russian military aircraft were struck and around 10 destroyed. Satellite imagery confirmed damage to valuable Tu-95 and Tu-22M3 bombers used to fire missiles against Ukraine.

Belaya Air Base is located in Siberia, thousands of kilometers from Ukraine. The operation proved that distance no longer provides security when drones can be smuggled into a country, hidden near their targets, and activated remotely.

This is why Russia has begun spreading anti-drone nets, electronic-warfare systems, armed guards, and localized defensive units across infrastructure that was never designed to become part of a battlefield. Reports even show Russia placing additional anti-drone protection over submarines at its Pacific base on the Kamchatka Peninsula, more than 4,500 miles from the Ukrainian front.

Damaging Russian refineries has not forced Putin to withdraw. Operation Spiderweb did not end Russia’s missile campaign. Striking Siberia did not bring peace. Each spectacular operation has instead been followed by additional Russian attacks, tighter internal controls, more militarization, and a deeper commitment by both governments to continue the war.

There is also a dangerous political calculation behind these attacks. Ukrainian officials believe that economic hardship and civilian fear will turn the Russian population against Putin. Yet Putin faces pressure from the opposite direction as well. Russian hardliners argue that he has been too restrained and that Moscow should retaliate more aggressively against Ukrainian government centers, transportation networks, energy infrastructure, and the Western systems enabling these strikes.

Russia has already lowered the threshold in its nuclear doctrine for responding to conventional attacks supported by nuclear powers. This does not mean Russia will automatically use a nuclear weapon, but it does mean NATO governments are recklessly testing a doctrine they did not write and cannot control.

The West supplies Ukraine with money, intelligence, satellite imagery, targeting assistance, components, and weapons. Western politicians then insist they are not participants in the war. Russia does not necessarily accept that legal fiction. If Western intelligence helps identify a target and a Ukrainian system attacks it, Moscow may eventually treat the sponsor and the operator as part of the same military structure.

The War Cycle for 2026 never suggested peace. It indicated rising volatility and expansion, with extremes in both directions. There may be negotiations, ceasefires, or temporary gestures toward settlement, followed by renewed aggression. That is precisely what we are witnessing. Every attempt at diplomacy is undermined by another strike, retaliation, arms package, territorial demand, or political promise that neither side can accept.

No one is asking where this ends. That has been the fatal mistake from the beginning.

Iran International reports that the average advertised monthly rent in Tehran has climbed to 723 million rials, or about $389 at the open-market exchange rate. Many Iranian workers earn only 200 million to 250 million rials per month, equivalent to $108 to $134. A worker must now surrender nearly three months of wages to pay one month of rent. That is the destruction of an entire population’s standard of living.

Rents have reportedly risen between 70% and 100% in parts of Tehran, despite the government’s 25% ceiling. Even Alireza Novin, a member of parliament’s construction committee, admitted that “the 25% rent increase is clearly not being observed.”

The IMF now projects that Iran’s economy will contract 5.4% in 2026, the worst annual decline in decades. Consumer-price inflation is projected to reach 68.9%. Estimates indicate that unemployment rose from 7.6% in the first quarter to 9.1% in the second, while industrial destruction and economic disruption may have eliminated around one million jobs.

The rial traded near 70 to the dollar at the time of the 1979 revolution. Iran International’s housing calculations now use an open-market rate of 1.86 million rials to the dollar. Iran’s government may issue a 10 million-rial banknote or remove zeros from the currency, but changing the numbers printed on the paper cannot restore the savings that were destroyed.

Food and beverages have risen 113.8% from the previous year, according to figures attributed to the Statistical Center of Iran. Bread and cereals increased 140%. Red meat and poultry rose 135%. Dairy products climbed 116.8%, while oils and fats surged 219%. Fruits and nuts increased more than 104%.

Rural inflation has reportedly reached 86.5%, compared with 69.3% in urban areas. The poorest citizens are being hit hardest because food, transportation, and household necessities consume nearly all their income. They do not own stocks, foreign property, or offshore bank accounts. Their entire wealth is their labor, and the government has destroyed the value of that labor.

Real income per person has fallen by approximately 47%, pushing the average Iranian’s purchasing power back toward levels last seen in the late 1990s. Poverty is estimated to affect about 36% of the population nationwide and as much as 50% in deprived regions. Iran is creating millions of working poor—people who still have jobs but can no longer afford to live.

The diet of the Iranian people is shrinking. Red meat supply has reportedly fallen to approximately 623,000 metric tons, about 20% below 2024 and nearly 39% below its 2010 level. Dairy consumption has declined to around 40 kilograms per person, roughly one-third of the global average. Families are not changing their diets for health reasons. They are abandoning meat and dairy because they cannot afford them.

Grocery workers have reported increasing theft of bread, cheese, butter, and meat. Medical patients are postponing treatment because they cannot afford medication. People are moving back in with their parents, sharing apartments with strangers, or fleeing Tehran for poorer outskirts.

Tindex estimates that the average advertised home in Tehran now costs more than 240 billion rials. A worker earning 250 million rials per month would need 80 years of gross wages to reach that price, assuming he never spent anything on food, rent, clothing, or taxes. Homeownership has become mathematically impossible for much of the population.

The war turned Iran’s prolonged decline into an active crisis. Factories, power plants, railways, airports, bridges, and industrial facilities have been damaged. Oil exports, the financial lifeline of the government, have reportedly fallen as much as 70% during periods of severe disruption. Some estimates place the economic cost of the blockade near $435 million per day.

The cumulative cost of the war has been estimated at around $144 billion, equivalent to roughly 40% of Iran’s prewar GDP. Whether every estimate proves exact is secondary to what Iranians can see: businesses closing, wages vanishing, investment stopping, and entire industries struggling to obtain materials or transport goods.

The government has compounded the damage by restricting the internet. Iran’s own communications ministry estimated that shutdowns cost the economy around 5 trillion rials per day at the official exchange rate. Other estimates placed the direct and indirect losses much higher. Online businesses lost customers, workers lost income, and private commerce was sacrificed so the state could suppress information.

Meanwhile, Iran’s rulers continue spending on missiles, proxies, internal surveillance, and political repression. The people are told to sacrifice for the revolution while those connected to the state preserve access to hard currency, property, and protected markets. The ruling class rarely eats the consequences of its policies. The people do.

Yet Washington and Israel should not celebrate this misery. Sanctions and blockades do not starve political elites first. Officials control state resources, smuggling networks, and foreign currency. It is the mother buying bread, the factory worker searching for an apartment, and the pensioner choosing between food and medicine who pays.

The neocons believe that enough bombing and deprivation will force Iran to surrender and produce a friendly democracy. They made the same argument in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Syria. Economic misery can produce revolution, but it can also produce repression, military rule, fragmentation, or civil war.

A government can manipulate inflation statistics and threaten landlords. It cannot hide an empty refrigerator or convince a worker that three months of wages should equal one month of rent. Many have turned to military service for survival, but what happens when the government cannot pay its troops? Iran’s people are watching their economy unravel in real time. Their wages have become scraps of paper, their savings have disappeared, and the idea of building a future is slipping beyond reach.

PRIVATE BLOG – Iran Manipulation the Elections

Private blog posts are exclusively available to Socrates subscribers. To sign-up for Socrates or to learn more, please visit Ask-Socrates.com.

https://ask-socrates.com/