Submitted by Thomas Kolbe
In the end, it happened as it had to: The United States will likely play a decisive role in the future development and marketing of Venezuela’s oil and gas reserves.
On Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump announced a corresponding deal on his Truth Social platform, describing it himself as "THE BIGGEST OIL DEAL IN WORLD HISTORY." According to the U.S. president, the United States secured “majority U.S. control” over more than 65 billion barrels of proven oil reserves in Venezuela, spread across 17 oil fields – and, as Trump emphasized, “at no cost to the American taxpayer.”
BREAKING NEWS: The United States of America has just entered into an Agreement with the Country of Venezuela on, THE BIGGEST OIL DEAL IN WORLD HISTORY! At my direction, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, working closely with Highly Respected… pic.twitter.com/lLl44Fp7cs
— Commentary Donald J. Trump Truth Social Posts On X (@TrumpTruthOnX) August 28, 2026Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves. The overwhelming majority, however, consists of extra-heavy and heavy crude, which must be diluted and processed through an elaborate procedure. Particularly in Texas, there is refinery capacity specifically designed for this type of processing – a circumstance that further reinforces America’s role as the world’s largest oil producer. Around 20 percent of the world’s oil reserves are located in Venezuelan territory, making the country the largest member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, OPEC, in terms of reserves.
OPEC is entering one of its most severe phases of erosion as a result of the agreement with the United States: In April, the United Arab Emirates had already announced its withdrawal from the cartel, effective May 1 – now Venezuela, a second founding member dating back to 1960, threatens to undermine the cartel’s common production logic. The agreement was negotiated with the Washington-backed transitional government under President Delcy Rodríguez in Caracas. Rodríguez, a former vice president of the country, is serving as interim president after Nicolás Maduro was arrested by U.S. special forces in January 2026 and taken to the United States, where he has been held ever since on drug-related charges.
What could the deal look like in practice? Little is known, but it can be assumed that the United States will establish a special-purpose company with participation from major oil producers such as ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips or Chevron, the only U.S. company with an operational presence in the country. The agreement still rests on shaky constitutional ground, however, since the Venezuelan constitution requires state control over the core activities of the oil industry. Will Caracas therefore first have to reform its laws?
Economically, the project sounds interesting. According to Rodríguez, the agreement is expected to initiate around $100 billion in investment in Venezuela’s oil sector. Caracas will also benefit: Over the 25-year term of the agreement, the country expects at least $209 billion in tax revenues – a gigantic leap forward, considering that the socialists under Maduro had also run this crucial economic sector into the ground, turning it into a self-service machine of corruption and cronyism.
The decision was announced just weeks before Chinese President Xi Jinping’s state visit, which is expected to take place in Washington on September 24. Xi therefore faces a fait accompli: The two important sources of oil for China – Venezuela and now Iran as well – appear to be blocked and are coming under U.S. political control. Donald Trump is thus creating facts in the rivalry between the two superpowers – control over oil is a bargaining chip, measured in millions of barrels of daily oil production.
With regard to the conflict with China and the increasingly difficult relationship with the EU, Trump’s geopolitics follows the logic of the sledgehammer: America First, debates are unwelcome. One can criticize this strategy; one may even have to. However, in order to obtain a complete picture, one should view the events from the American perspective: Until the energy-policy shift, the deregulation of fossil fuels and the unleashing of the fossil resources available in the United States, EU climate policy dominated in Washington. Above all, it was Barack Obama who, in 2009, submitted to the CO₂ diktat of ideological desk-bound technocrats from Davos, Brussels and Berlin. Since Trump’s return to the White House, the motto has been: Drill, Baby, Drill – now also by means of a state agreement covering Venezuela’s oil and gas fields.
The United States divides the world into Manichean categories – those who stand by its side are good, whether in the conflict with Iran, in gaining access to Greenland’s rare earths, or in removing the dictator Maduro in Venezuela. Those who refuse to submit are bad. The European Union undoubtedly belongs to the latter category and is increasingly perceived in Washington as an enemy.
For the EU, which is heavily dependent on energy imports, Trump’s aggressive energy policy could become a major problem.
Having fallen out with Russia and virtually powerless in the face of the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz, Europe is dependent on American liquefied natural gas supplies. This is precisely why the question must be asked: What prevents Europeans from activating their own energy reserves? A rhetorical question: Brussels and Berlin have become trapped in ideological delusion and in the hope that the specter in the White House will be gone again in two and a half years and that they can return to business as usual. In this case, “business as usual” means that the United States will once again submit to European climate rules as it did before.
But that is still a long way off.
And the role of the eternal childish antagonist does not suit the Germans particularly well. Destructive climate and energy policy, whose provisional climax will be the flooding of the coal mines of the Ruhr region, appears childish in an international context – economically, it is simply a catastrophe. All of this weighs heavily – it burdens the country’s political culture, it tears its economy apart and exposes the ever-deeper divide between citizens and politics. In retrospect, it proves tragic that the country’s decisive affairs of state, its energy policy and the economy in general were placed in the hands of left-green degrowth fanatics and socialists.
It is hardly surprising that the path to the future technology of nuclear power appears blocked, and that no one dares to pursue fracking or the development of Germany’s own gas fields in the North and Baltic Seas. The country is intellectually and ideologically paralyzed and is now paying the economic price for its pre-Enlightenment ideology.
Tyler Durden Tue, 09/01/2026 - 06:30Bernstein's latest GLP-1 tracker has Eli Lilly's Mounjaro leading script growth, with downstream effects compounding pressure on the restaurant industry already facing weakening consumer confidence, as gas prices nationwide remain above a politically sensitive $4 a gallon in late summer.
Turning to UBS's latest note on the restaurant industry, Dennis Geiger, who covers U.S. restaurants and consumer discretionary names, wrote in a note on Sunday that restaurant investors are struggling to identify opportunities across the space amid sharp share-price volatility, weakening consumer confidence, growing uncertainty over the second-half outlook, and increasing GLP-1 adoption.
He points to a widening divide across the industry:
Geiger's note touched on not just an increasingly bifurcated U.S. consumer environment and dismal University of Michigan consumer sentiment, but also pointed out that quick-service chains face a particularly difficult combination of sluggish traffic, persistent inflation, and GLP-1 adoption.
Geiger cited a new survey from the National Restaurant Association that showed GLP-1 impacts: users are ordering smaller portions and fewer indulgent items after starting the wonder anti-fat drug, with Gen X cutting desserts and portion size most aggressively and Gen Z more likely to swap entrees for appetizers, add fiber, and drink less alcohol. The result is pressure on check averages and mix, especially desserts, sugary drinks, alcohol, and oversized entrees, rather than an immediate collapse in visits.
He expanded:
While GLP-1 users are less frequently going out to eat at restaurants, ordering takeout and using delivery, users are purchasing a meal / snack / beverage from a restaurant / coffee shop / snack place more often than non GLP-1 users, according to a recent webinar from the National Restaurant Association (NRA). GLP-1 users skew toward a higher-income cohort that is likely to eat out more frequently, but as GLP-1s become more accessible (w/ lower prices and oral forms), adoption across income cohorts should be more balanced. We note the NRA also indicated: a high percentage of GLP-1 users agree that healthy menu items are available at restaurants; GLP-1 users enjoy going out to restaurants; and users indicate going out to eat is a way to socialize, suggesting changing eating habits do not greatly affect affinity for dining out. Additionally, a high percentage of users indicate better communication of healthy options and portion size options is preferred at restaurants. The NRA highlights 1) value is not just the amount of food for a low price, but can include high protein, other nutrients, or health benefits for a low price, 2) growth in snacking and smaller portions among GLP-1 users, 3) lower ticket averages for users offset by increased visit frequency, add-on, and upcharges, and 4) beverage consumption away from alcohol, towards non- alcoholic options. The NRA also called out select brands with menu changes that have responded to GLP-1 preferences, including Chipotle, Olive Garden, and Shake Shack.
Figure 1: After starting GLP-1 drugs, users increasingly order smaller portions and less indulgent items.
The second chart shows why consumers are pulling back on alcohol at restaurants, citing mostly personal preferences and health concerns.
Figure 2: Reduction in alcohol consumption is driven by personal preferences and health reasons.
Traders are still searching for winners inside an increasingly pressured restaurant complex as several headwinds hit at once: weakening confidence, $4 gasoline, a bifurcated consumer, and rising GLP-1 adoption.
No Direction in S&P500 1500 Restaurant Index
UBS's Geiger and the NRA survey only suggest that consumers are trading down, ordering smaller portions, skipping desserts and sugary items, and drinking less alcohol - more selective, not necessarily boycotting visits. This is a lower-ticket issue that restaurants must adapt to.
Professional subscribers can read the full note here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal
Tyler Durden Tue, 09/01/2026 - 05:45Authored by Chris Summers via The Epoch Times,
NATO military activity in the Arctic poses a direct threat to Russia's security and could lead to disastrous consequences, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov wrote in an article published by the Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday.
A Russian soldier stands guard beside a Pansyr-S1 air defense system on Kotelny Island, part of the New Siberian Islands archipelago located between the Laptev Sea and the East Siberian Sea, in Russia on April 3, 2019. Vladimir Isachenkov/APIn February, NATO conducted Arctic Sentry, a large-scale military exercise in the Arctic and High North regions, amid concerns over the threat posed by both Russia and China. Russia, which has a naval fleet in the Arctic that includes nuclear-armed submarines dating back to the Soviet era, has long viewed the region as its sphere of interest.
"Intensive military preparations are underway in close proximity to our northern borders," Lavrov said. "NATO is conducting large-scale military exercises involving non-regional countries and introducing new components of its command-and-control system."
He said such activity increases the "risk of incidents that could trigger an armed confrontation with potentially disastrous consequences."
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said in February that Arctic Sentry was launched as a result of "Russia's increased military activity, and China's growing interest in the High North."
Lavrov said the West was also attempting to undermine Russia's international cooperation in the Arctic with countries from the "Global Majority," a term the Kremlin often uses to describe African and Asian countries.
Last month, at the NATO summit in Turkey, U.S. President Donald Trump again pressed for the United States to take control of Greenland, which he said has become a national security concern because of increasing Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic.
'Landmark' Shipping VoyageMoscow is keen on developing the Northern Sea Route, an Arctic shipping corridor that creates a shortcut between Europe and Northeast Asian markets, including China, South Korea and Japan. It could cut the time for a container ship by 10 days compared with the regular route via the Indian Ocean and the Suez Canal, according to the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy.
In his article, Lavrov said a "landmark event" in Arctic shipping occurred on Aug. 19.
"For the first time, a container ship from China arrived at the port of Murmansk via the Northern Sea Route, a vital part of the Trans-Arctic Transport Corridor," he said.
The Barents Observer reported that the vessel was the Xin Xin Hai-1, a cargo ship that sails under a Hong Kong flag.
Lavrov said the Arctic contributed at least 10 percent of Russia's GDP and was home to more than 2.5 million Russian citizens.
China's Foreign Affairs Minister Wang Yi (L) and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (R) exchange documents during a signing ceremony following talks in Moscow on May 8, 2025. Kirill Kudryavtsev/AFP via Getty ImagesHe said Moscow was ready to cooperate with other nations over the development of the region.
"There are prospects for interaction in the Far North with Brazil, Indonesia, Iran and other BRICS countries," Lavrov said, referring to an economic bloc which also includes India, Egypt, and Ethiopia.
"The vast resource, transport, and logistics potential of the Far North, its unique natural and climatic features, long-standing traditions of regional cooperation, and the rich cultural heritage of its indigenous peoples offer broad opportunities for advantageous partnership."
Russia's neighbor Norway said on Aug. 20 that it had expanded its Arctic brigade with an artillery battalion, an anti-aircraft battery, and a joint company.
"Russia's illegal war of aggression against Ukraine and the worsening security situation underline the need to build up the Finnmark Brigade as quickly as possible," the Norwegian Armed Forces stated.
Norway will also ignore the European Union's demands for a moratorium on hydrocarbon exploration in the Arctic Circle and continue drilling for oil and gas in the Barents Sea, the country's energy minister said last week.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has led to increased fear among NATO member countries in Scandinavia, the Baltic, and eastern Europe that Russia poses a renewed threat, and there has been an uptick in defense spending as a result.
Moscow has previously dismissed allegations that it poses a threat to NATO.
Reuters contributed to this report.
Tyler Durden Tue, 09/01/2026 - 05:00German Chancellor Friedrich Merz spent Sunday fearmongering on public broadcaster ARD, warning that a potential victory for Alternative for Germany in next Sunday's Saxony-Anhalt election could inflict economic damage on the region.
Deutschland kann viel. Die Potenziale unseres Landes sind groß – und diese müssen wir nutzen. pic.twitter.com/4GFF5gtmyt
— Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz (@bundeskanzler) August 31, 2026Merz's assessment conflicts with Nomura's political analysis, which suggests investors no longer reflexively fear right-wing victories. Instead, markets are increasingly focused on the economic consequences of left-wing policies, particularly deindustrialization, elevated energy costs, and uncontrolled mass migration, all of which have been nothing short of nation-killing.
"If things turn out the way the polls suggest, this federal state will face significant problems," Merz told broadcaster ARD. He questioned whether international companies would invest or build factories in a state governed by an AfD premier.
Polls show the AfD attracting more than 40% support, potentially double the roughly 20% backing for Merz's Christian Democratic Union. The center-right party has governed Saxony-Anhalt for more than two decades.
"The state will suffer considerable damage if the scenario we currently fear comes to pass," Merz said during the interview.
An AfD victory this coming weekend could produce Germany's first state government led by the right-wing party.
Merz's fearmongering comes as his approval ratings are the lowest recorded for any postwar German chancellor. Economic troubles have rocked Europe's largest economy, while voters have grown increasingly frustrated with Berlin.
Andrzej Szczepaniak, a senior European economist and executive director at Nomura, wrote last week about "the seeds of political change" and noted that "politics in Europe is lurching towards more populism."
Szczepaniak said, "Five years ago, financial markets would not have seemed so at ease with such a prospect. But then again, these populist right-wing political parties were previously not as fiscally prudent as they are perceived to be today. Indeed, Italy's Giorgia Meloni is the standard-bearer for financial markets of how a populist right-wing political party can govern: fiscally prudent enough to show investors that the party can govern responsibly while focusing heavily on social issues, including immigration and culture wars, to keep grassroots supporters happy."
He added, "Financial markets are much more concerned about populist left-wing parties being elected due to their desire to increase spending, often paid for through higher borrowing or higher taxes, which are likely to shut the engine off of already stuttering economies."
Looking ahead, Szczepaniak noted that right-wing parties are positioned to make significant gains across Germany, France, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK over the next 18 months.
Tyler Durden Tue, 09/01/2026 - 04:15Authored by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Dangerous Talk of Putin’s ‘Loss’ in Ukraine
VIPS tells President Trump that once apprised of the reality on the ground (and in the air) by his intelligence advisors, he might choose to do what is in his power to end the disaster in Ukraine.
Dear President Trump:The New York Times is reporting that the outlook for Russia in Ukraine is “bleak.” C.I.A. Director John Ratcliffe is said to have explained that to the Russians while in Moscow Tuesday. He reportedly urged them “to cut a deal before their military and economic situation gets worse.”
We write you on the chance you may be taken in by this latest song and dance. We believe it is orchestrated by the same kind of geniuses who told President Joe Biden to announce on July 13, 2023, in a major speech in Helsinki, that the Russians had “already lost the war” in Ukraine.
We suggest that you “kick the tires,” if they try to sell you that same car. Nothing could be further from the truth. Your predecessor was ill-served by intelligence. We suspect you are getting the same tendentious treatment from your own advisers. Indeed, many of them seem unconscionably relaxed about risking wider war with Russia over Ukraine.
White House imageWe offer you, as we offered Biden, the following jogs to memory:
— December 3, 2022: “Russia is using up ammunition quite quickly. It’s pretty extraordinary. Our sense is that Russia is not capable of indigenously producing what they are expending at this stage.” (National Intelligence Director Avril Haines)
— March 18, 2022: “Russia has lost in Ukraine. The West should recognize this Russian defeat.” (Anatol Lieven, Quincy Institute)
— July 1 & July 7, 2023: “Putin’s war has already been a strategic failure for Russia – its military weaknesses laid bare; its economy badly damaged for years to come.” (C.I.A. Director William Burns)
The Church of Latter-Day PunditsTwo NY Times journalists who specialize in intelligence matters report Thursday that this latest version of the Russia-has-already-lost story is “the current C.I.A. director’s assessment.” They warn somewhat quizzically that, despite this, President Putin might ignore it “and choose to keep fighting.” But why would Putin do that?
Indeed, the Gray Lady and her intelligence sources seem quite baffled by why Putin would keep trying when, according to U.S. officials and pundits, he started losing three and a half years ago and continues to lose. Could it possibly be that it was they that were wrong – terribly wrong?
Dismissing that as a possibility, they perform a somersault, straighten up, and chose to blame Putin’s advisers who, the Times says, have not “given Putin honest assessments of the war’s trajectory and toll.”
If Black Humor is at work here, we do not find it funny. The slaughter in Ukraine brings hundreds of victims daily.
Russia is methodically advancing in Donbass along a thousand-mile front, it is weathering drone attacks on its oil and civilian infrastructure with enhanced interception and has enforced a virtual blockade on Ukraine’s largest port, Odessa, with withering aerial attacks. Ukraine’s manpower and interceptor shortages make it impossible for it to ever recover its lost territory, as you acknowledged after your meeting with President Putin in Alaska.
Mr. President, if you were given access to reality-based, honest intelligence, you would be able to decide for yourself whose advisers have gotten it right over these past five years. And, once apprised of the reality on ground (and in the air), you might choose to do what is in your power to end the disaster in Ukraine.
Déjà VuThis is not the first time we advised a president to seek unbiased advice with a view toward avoiding unnecessary, catastrophic war. We did that just a few hours after Colin Powell’s deceptive presentation to the U.N. Security Council on February 5, 2003.
Today, we strongly suggest that you broaden your circle of advisers, as we urged President George W. Bush to do then, in our first VIPS Memorandum, which ended with this recommendation:
“After watching Secretary Powell today, we are convinced that you would be well served if you widened the discussion beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.”
FOR THE STEERING GROUP, VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY (VIPS)
Fulton Armstrong, former National Intelligence Officer (ret.)
Philip Giraldi, C.I.A., Operations Officer (ret.)
Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq and Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
Larry C. Johnson, former C.I.A. and State Department Counter Terrorism officer
John Kiriakou, former C.I.A. Counterterrorism Officer and former senior investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., U.S. Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003
Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army infantry/intelligence officer & C.I.A. analyst; C.I.A. Presidential briefer (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer/NE, National Intelligence Council & C.I.A. political analyst (ret.)
Scott Ritter, former MAJ, USMC; former U.N. Weapons Inspector, Iraq
Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)
Sarah G. Wilton, CDR, USNR, (ret.); Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.)
Ann Wright, retired U.S. Army reserve colonel and former U.S. diplomat who resigned in 2003 in opposition to the Iraq War