Read more

There are a lot of moving parts and the situation is evolving quickly, which makes it difficult to track every development in real time. But stepping back from the daily headlines, a few things are relatively clear.

Over the past several days tensions between the United States, Israel, and Iran have escalated significantly following strikes on Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure and the possibility of retaliation across the region. Airspace closures, evacuation advisories, and the positioning of military assets across the Persian Gulf suggest that governments are preparing for a scenario where the confrontation expands beyond a single exchange.

Whether this becomes a short escalation or something larger is still uncertain.

But from a business and investment perspective, the more important question is what happens to the systems that sit underneath the global economy if this conflict spreads.

The Strait of Hormuz Is Still the World’s Most Important Chokepoint

Roughly 20% of the world’s oil supply passes through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow shipping corridor only about 33km wide at its tightest point.

That oil feeds the industrial economies of Asia and beyond:

• India receives roughly 60% of its oil imports through this route

• China roughly 40%

• Japan nearly three quarters

If that corridor becomes unstable, the effects move quickly.

Energy prices spike. Shipping insurance costs surge. Supply chains tighten. Inflation pressures return almost immediately.

The reason the Strait of Hormuz has remained open for decades has less to do with geography and more to do with security guarantees. The U.S. and its allies have long maintained naval dominance in the region specifically to prevent disruptions to global energy flows.

But the current escalation introduces a new variable: if Iran sees itself under direct military pressure, threatening shipping routes becomes one of the few asymmetric levers it possesses.

And once global energy flows are at risk, the conflict stops being regional.

The Gulf Is Not Just an Energy Region Anymore

Oil is only one layer of why this region matters today.

Over the past twenty years the Gulf has become deeply embedded in the architecture of global finance.

The basic structure works like this:

Gulf states export oil in U.S. dollars.
Those revenues accumulate in sovereign wealth funds.
Those funds then deploy capital into global markets, especially the United States.

This recycling of petrodollars has quietly become one of the stabilizing forces behind global equity markets.

Sovereign wealth funds from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait now rank among the largest investors in the world. A meaningful portion of their portfolios sits in U.S. technology companies and investment funds tied to artificial intelligence, semiconductor manufacturing, and digital infrastructure.

If regional tensions force Gulf governments to prioritize security and domestic resilience, those investment flows could slow or shift.

Not collapse, but change direction.

And that would have implications far beyond the Middle East.

Europe’s Alignment Raises the Stakes

Another important development in recent days has been the alignment of European allies.

The United Kingdom has already signaled willingness to provide logistical and security support for Western operations in the region, including the potential use of military bases. Other NATO members have echoed similar language about supporting U.S. security objectives. This coming quickly after the stale response NATO has had to the U.S. pulling participation…

From a geopolitical standpoint, this matters.

When a regional confrontation begins to draw in European military support, it signals to the rest of the world that the conflict is no longer purely bilateral.

And that changes the strategic calculations of other global powers.

Why China and Russia Are Watching Closely

China imports enormous quantities of energy from the region. Russia has its own strategic interests in limiting Western military influence while maintaining leverage over global energy markets.

Neither country has an incentive to see the Strait of Hormuz destabilized.

But they also have little incentive to allow Western powers to dictate the balance of power in the region without resistance.

That does not necessarily mean direct military involvement. Far more likely are indirect responses:

diplomatic backing for Iran
economic coordination
increased energy trade outside Western channels
or strategic positioning in adjacent regions

In other words, the conflict could begin to resemble the broader geopolitical pattern we have seen elsewhere in recent years - major powers supporting opposing sides without entering direct confrontation.

From a purely economic perspective, the immediate impact is already showing up in Asian markets. The MSCI Asia Pacific Index fell roughly 6% this week, compared with only a 0.1% decline in the S&P 500, reflecting how exposed many Asian economies remain to energy flows through the Gulf.

Where This Connects Back to the Global Economy

Once you zoom out, a pattern becomes visible.

Energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz.
Oil revenues accumulate in Gulf sovereign wealth funds.
Those funds deploy capital into global markets (particularly the U.S.).

If conflict disrupts even one part of that chain, the ripple effects move through the entire system.

And today’s financial markets are particularly sensitive to those disruptions.

The AI Economy Is Driving a Large Share of Growth

One reason this matters is the structure of the U.S. economy itself.

Recent analysis from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis shows that investment in artificial intelligence infrastructure, data centers, communications equipment, and related technologies, has become a major contributor to U.S. economic growth.

A relatively small number of technology companies now drive a large portion of market performance.

That works extremely well during stable periods.

But it also means that equity markets become more sensitive to shocks that affect global capital flows or energy prices.

If sovereign wealth investment slows or geopolitical risk rises, the companies sitting at the center of the AI boom become more exposed to volatility.

What I’m Watching Closely

I don’t see the current escalation as the collapse of the global system.

What I see is a stress test.

The United States remains the deepest capital market in the world and the primary engine of global technological innovation. Gulf economies remain some of the most sophisticated investors and fastest-growing financial hubs anywhere. And despite geopolitical tensions, global supply chains and capital flows are still deeply interconnected.

But moments like this reveal how dependent the system has become on a small number of strategic chokepoints — energy corridors, capital recycling mechanisms, and a narrow group of technology companies driving economic growth.

Geopolitical tension doesn’t usually break those systems overnight. What it tends to do instead is accelerate structural shifts that were already underway.

Countries diversify their alliances.
Companies rethink supply chains.
Capital gradually spreads across more regions.

The result is not necessarily the end of the U.S.-led financial system, but the gradual emergence of something more distributed. A network of interconnected economic hubs rather than a single dominant center.

Right now the Middle East sits directly in the middle of that transition.

So rather than focusing on the daily headlines, there are three signals I’m paying close attention to.

First: shipping activity through the Strait of Hormuz.

If tanker traffic continues normally, markets will likely interpret the current escalation as contained geopolitical risk. Energy prices may fluctuate, but the global economy adapts quickly.

If shipping slows or insurance costs for vessels moving through the strait begin to rise significantly, that’s when the situation starts to move from regional tension into systemic economic risk.

Hormuz is not just a regional chokepoint it is one of the central valves of the global energy system.

Second: what Gulf sovereign wealth funds do with their capital.

Funds in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar collectively manage trillions of dollars and play an enormous role in global equity markets, venture capital, and technology infrastructure investment.

If regional instability forces governments to prioritize domestic resilience, even for a short time — defense systems, infrastructure protection, food supply chains — we could see sovereign capital gradually shift toward internal investment.

That doesn’t mean capital disappears. But it does change where it flows.

And when capital moves, markets tend to follow.

Third: where the next wave of AI infrastructure gets built.

Artificial intelligence has become one of the largest drivers of economic growth in the U.S., with massive investment flowing into data centers, semiconductor fabrication, and high-performance computing infrastructure.

If geopolitical tensions accelerate the fragmentation of global systems, we may begin to see more distributed AI infrastructure emerge across Europe, Asia, and the Gulf itself.

In other words, the physical backbone of the AI economy may become geographically diversified in the same way global manufacturing did over the past two decades.

None of these signals will provide instant answers.

But together they tell us something far more useful than headlines: whether the global system is absorbing the shock or beginning to reorganize itself around it.

And that is the question that matters most for investors, operators, and anyone trying to understand where the next era of global economic growth will take shape.

Who gets to design them?

In the last essay, I wrote about capital regimes, incentives, and macro structure — about how inter…

Read more

The idea that keeps clarifying for me i…

Read more

Horowitz’s articulation of American Dynamism, alongside the fact that Andreessen Horowitz raised an unprecedented share (18% to be exact) of U.S. venture capital in a single cycle, is not just a data point. It’s a signal. Capital is consolidating. Agendas are becoming explicit. And venture is increasingly being discussed as part of a broader system that includes policy, procurement, and long-term economic strategy.

I find much of this compelling. But I also believe the way this idea is often framed captures only part of what is actually happening at a global scale.

VC Has Crossed a Threshold

One thing is now undeniable: venture capital is no longer just about identifying promising companies early and helping them scale. It has become a mechanism through which entire architectures — AI, financial infrastructure, healthcare systems, energy, defense, education — are financed, shaped, and normalized.

In that context, the idea of “dynamism” is not ideological. It is structural.

Large, well-capitalized platforms can take on regulatory complexity, fund long development cycles, influence standards, and align private innovation with public demand. At a macro level, this works. It creates coherence. It allows certain kinds of complex systems to be built at all.

But macro coherence almost always introduces micro constraints.

Capital Concentration Solves One Problem and Creates Another

When a small number of firms control a large share of venture capital, the system becomes more legible — but also more prescriptive.

Capital naturally flows toward:

• established narratives,

• recognizable founder profiles,

• categories that fit existing mental models,

• and strategies that align with institutional priorities.

This isn’t a critique of intent. It’s simply how large systems behave.

The tradeoff is subtle but important. As capital concentrates, the surface area for non-obvious innovation narrows. Decisions become layered. Theses harden. Risk is evaluated not only on potential outcomes, but on coherence with broader agendas.

This dynamic is efficient at scale.
It is far less effective at sensing what is emerging outside the center of gravity.

American Dynamism Is Directionally Right but Incomplete

Where I begin to think differently is not in the belief that America matters, or that systems need to be built, or that venture capital plays a role in shaping the future.

It is in the implicit assumption that the most important innovation will continue to originate, consolidate, and resolve primarily within a single geography.

That assumption no longer holds.

Over the last decade, three shifts have taken place quietly but decisively.

First, technical capability has globalized.
Exceptional founders, engineers, and operators now emerge everywhere, with access to the same tools, knowledge, and distribution that were once geographically concentrated.

Second, capital formation has diversified.
Long-term, sophisticated capital is increasingly active across the Middle East, parts of Asia, and Europe — often with patience, scale, and strategic intent.

Third, ecosystem design has become intentional.
Governments and institutions outside the U.S. are actively constructing environments that support entrepreneurship through talent visas, regulatory frameworks, procurement pathways, and infrastructure.

These regions are not trying to replicate Silicon Valley. They are building their own innovation systems, optimized for their markets, constraints, and ambitions.

The World Is Becoming Multi-Node

This does not imply the decline of the United States. It implies a change in topology.

The future looks less like a single dominant center and more like a network of supernodes — interconnected, competitive, and mutually reinforcing. Value is increasingly created locally, scaled regionally, and realized globally.

The most interesting opportunities do not come from betting against any one country or region. They come from understanding how innovation flows between systems and where those flows are still inefficient or underdeveloped.

Why I’m Focused on Emerging Regions, not Labels

My interest is not in advocating for “emerging managers” as a category.
It is in investing early in emerging regions that are producing extraordinary talent and increasingly capable companies, often before those ecosystems become obvious to global capital.

I believe many of the next generational companies will be built:

• outside traditional venture centers,

• inside fast-forming ecosystems,

• by founders who understand both local realities and global ambition.

Some of these companies will enter U.S. markets (through commercial expansion interests)
Some will partner with or be acquired by global incumbents.
Others will become dominant players in large, under-appreciated regions.
Some will define entirely new categories.

The common thread is not geography.
It is systems leverage.

A Different Interpretation of Dynamism

I support the idea of dynamism. But I interpret it differently.

To me, dynamism is not about pulling innovation inward.
It is about remaining adaptive in a world where innovation is increasingly distributed.

The systems that endure are not those that attempt to control everything, but those that can:

• integrate external innovation,

• set interoperable standards,

• attract global talent,

• and deploy capital where it compounds most effectively.

This requires openness, not isolation. Coordination, not consolidation alone.

Venture as Systems Thinking

We are now having a more honest conversation about what venture capital actually does. It shapes incentives. It allocates attention. It determines which systems get built and which never do.

In that sense, venture is no longer just a market.
It is part of the operating system of the global economy.

I am betting that the next decade belongs to investors who understand:

• how ecosystems are constructed,

• how power and capability shift across regions,

• and how to allocate capital across a multi-node world before it becomes consensus.

The opportunity is not ideological.
It is structural.

And it starts with seeing the system clearly.

Read more

Read more

Read more

Everyone loves getting paid. Nobody loves chasing invoices, managing calendars, or sorting through a swamp of emails. For entrepreneurs, small businesses, and creatives, these mundane o…

Read more

Read more

Read more

Read more

Read more

Read more