This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane, along with Jonathan Farroll and Lisa Abramowitz. Join us each day for insight from the best an economics, geopolitics, finance and investment. Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple, Spotify and anywhere you get your podcasts, and always on Bloomberg dot Com, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app. Joining us with twenty two V Research. Twenty two V Research is
Michael Herson, head of their China research. This morning, Michael, were you surprised by the NBC report of a discussion between the two world leaders over the future of Taiwan.
No, not particularly surprised. It was consistent with what I heard from the meeting. I obviously wasn't there, so I can't speak to the details, but I think the notion that she didn Ping is determined to pursue reunification with Taiwan is not new. I think in some ways it was equally as interesting that he told US officials, according to this report, that there is no set timeline for China to do so, and I think that is consistent with the view that while this is a really important issue.
Beijing continues to exercise what you could call strategic patients on this issue, and that's important because if that changes, it does I think, you know, increase the near term risks around Taiwan. For now, I think those near term risks are manageable.
There is this question around whether China is going to take an opportunity at a time where the US is involved in a two front proxy war with both Russia and Iran, to try to engage in this more aggressively since it's already difficult for the US to commit exactly how much they're going to weigh on these other conflicts.
I don't think we should dismiss those kinds of concerns. I mean, we need to be realistic about, you know, not mirror imaging in terms of how China thinks that they're going to think about this the same way that we do. At the same time, I think we need to keep in mind there's a fundamental calculus that work for Beijing, which is right now, it would be extremely risky, even with the US tied down, so to speak, with other conflicts, to pursue reunification through military means. And I
don't think that the urgency is there for China. I think Beijing continues to feel that time is on their side now that timeline is not infinite, as according to the report she Dian paying stress to President Biden. But I think the notion that Beijing would take this kind of gamble in the near term seems to me probably not worth it from the standpoint of China's leadership.
What is the motivation to try to take Taiwan at a time where there are some real clouds over the economic outlook for China, where they're trying to woo back US and other international businesses, and where Xijinping is dealing with a host of issues around the housing market that are also challenging.
I think that's exactly right. I think if they made this kind of move now, it would basically be trading off all of Sheet and Pang's broader ambitions for China in terms of economic development and its place in global leadership. So I don't think that the calculus is worth it for Beijing. I think the risk is that this could change over time. Beijing could decide that it's less risky
and we're urgent for them as time goes on. But I don't think that that calculus is going to shift such as to arguing for in our conflict over Taiwan anytime to it. We should add, though, we have a very important election coming up in Taiwan January thirteenth, the presidential election, which is going to have an important bearing on these issues.
This is right where I wanted to go, michae Elson. One final question. We've got to march on here with our day and thank you so much for joining, but abruptly here our stereotype is the KMT in the Pan Blue coalition they lost in twenty sixteen. The domestic politics of Taiwan, are they uniformly for America and four independencers? There are a nuance there that Beijing can play off of.
There's a nuance. I do think fundamentally voters in Taiwan want to maintain the status quo, and the difference between the two camps really is what is the best way to maintain that status quo? Keeping China aut in arm's length or engaging with China in a more close, you know, political economic relationship.
A terrific brief Michael Hurston, thank you so much, sirill that you could join.
Us, super excited that Francis Donald's with us in the studio Global Chief Economist, strategist a manual Life morte Francis, good morning. You've taken all that beautiful fed speak of the last week, any Cleara.
I think it's all semantics. We are in a global easing cycle. They can tell us they're not talking about it, but then we're talking about how they're not talking about it. Emerging markets are cutting. Every single day I get a new emerging market that's cutting. They led the cycle on the way up in rates, they are leading on the way down. Every morning I wake up to inflation prints that are surprising to the downside. Macro is most valuable at inflection points. The toothpaste is out of the tube.
We have already effectively eased. We will see it very soon in some areas, like housing that has very strong reactivity. It doesn't change that. I still technically have two quarters of negative GDP in my forecast, so that's technically a recession. But if we do get this earlier easing via financial markets, it will help us come out faster, and it will reduce the odds of financial accidents, which has been a concern for some economists on the show with.
Apple with thirty times forward earnings, right, excuse me on present earnings thirty two times pe multiple. They need to make earnings, they need to make revenues, which means they need to live within decent nominal GDP. Are we going to see enough on nominal GDP to keep the earnings in revenue boat going?
I don't know where it's going to come from. Tom. It's not coming from CAP which is declining sharply. There's not a lot of fiscal room. We talk about the soft lining hard landing. That's only a US conversation because anywhere else I go in the world, we're not discussing soft landing or hardlining because we're already in hard landing. Germany is most probably in a recession. A whole range
of dms are already in recession. Asia is slowing very prominently, so we don't have the global impulse that comes through, and the consumer is declining and slow. We don't need the consumer to be in a recession for the US economy to be in a recession. So two things can be true at the same time. We can be celebrating the pivot party, which we are, and recognize that it's not going to be a straight line up for equities
and a straight line down for bonds. In fact, I my ask of you actually at this table is every time you have a guest, come on, ask them what their investment horizon is, because your investment horizon for the next three months is very different than your nine month to twelvemonth horizon, and you have to be able to reconcile the two when they are different perspectives, and in this environment they are different perspective.
We already know it's happ and yes that I extrap light that out five minutes and say if it changes, isn't that it brama the last two months?
I mean, this is a reason why people are saying we're bullish. There might be some volatility, but by it and so at what point is this just basically being bullish into next year and trying to have a unique take on it. Here's my question to you, is there a risk of us not getting a landing if you have a longer term horizon, does it have to include a greater risk of reinflation?
You know, if you have a five to tenure horizon, which a lot of sticky institutional money does. They are not asking me, do you have a recession call? They want to know what the five to ten year inflation outlook is. They want to know where interest rates are going to be. They want to know our central Bank's going to be changing inflation targets because if so, then our relationship between inflation and interest rate changes, and that
changes our long term asset allocation models. So no, there are certain investors who do not care about recession risk for twenty twenty four, and that's important. They are asking larger, more important questions about the framework within our front with which our financial markets change. And that's why I think the Powell pivot is so critical and interesting to this large sticky money because it basically said this concept of you know what, we need two percent inflation in order
to cut We need to see the evidence. We're focused on services, ex rents, all of this discussion around financial conditions. Now I've heard you over the past few days question what was it that led to the pivot? That question, to me is far more important than how many rate cuts do we have next year? Or is it one quarter or two quarters of negative GDPs?
So let's go to the labor market and talk about some of the forces underpinning maybe this pivot. There's a belief on the street from a lot of people, I think, led by Neil data earlier on this year, that this labor market is no longer a reason to be hawkish. What America has benefited from is this supply side led rebalancing in the labor market, increased participation. Do you see reason to believe that continues into next year? Is that something we're taking for granted.
Yeah, any sort of leading indicator you have of the job market right now is going to tell you that things are deteriorating and going in the wrong direction. Now, markets are second rerivative creatures. They're going to care more about the rise and the unemployment rate than how far it necessarily goes up until a breaking point. So the unemployment rate is going to rise. It takes two years for the first FED rate hike to impact the labor market.
That's q one. The mistaken calling for that to happen last year was thinking that that lag would be shorter because the Fed moved faster. But until we get through the next three to six months, we won't be able to say that the relationship between rates and the labor market is truly broken because we haven't even passed the first starting post of when that's going to impact things.
So I can't throw out the argument that the labor market interest rate conversation is totally different than it has been in the past because we're not even there yet.
So what do you watch to see if wage disinflation begins?
Well, real time data. Probably we need surveys, We need to be keeping a close eye on that, But maybe tom we also need to be asking how much is it going to matter to the inflation story. We went from nine percent down to three per and change on inflation largely off of the disinflation from supply chain dynamics. Are we allowed to say that that was transitory?
Yet?
Like, is my head going to be on a stick for that?
Would you like to I'll just floated.
I'm going to throw up the balloon and see what kind of push back again on Twitter. The next phase is when you say, you know, the next phase of disinflation is what they call the painful part, not because it's hard to go from three percent to two percent, but because consumers and wages carry the brunt of that. So we would posit that the disinflation we've seen so far, we don't get to actually say thank you Fed for that.
It's the next part that comes. And so what I want to know is this wage inflation story, how critical is it to actually the inflation that we're monitoring? And what inflation does the FED need to see. Is it just a headline number or core number around two or does it matter where it's coming from, because my sense is we got told a lot in the past year. It mattered where it was coming from. I think it just matters that we're closer to Targe.
I'm so pleased that you brought some of these issues up because think it's so important. Lisa, just how much of the disinflation that we've seen so far is actually off the back of the feder reserve tightening in the last eighteen months. Speak to people like Francis, the answer is not much of it.
When you talk to a lot of economists, they've been using the tea word all along. They just are being a little bit louder about it and basically saying maybe the FED was right and it was transitory, and that's the reason why the Fed's getting nervous, because if the Fed's actual raid hike start to kick in, then it starts to become something else in a downward cycle. That said, the jury is still out and services sector inflation is still going up. So this is a huge question mark.
Not too much.
We still have supply tain.
Issues recycling the tea words shameless, just shameless. Yeah, are you talking to me, Francis Donald head on a state Francis, thank you. You one of the best to appreciate it.
The inflation adjusted yield, which is what I look at and our next guest looks at, is one point six nine percent. It was a two and there was sweat on effect hired a two point two zero or even unimaginately high. In this melt up, the inflation adjusted yield, one measurement of our good feeling, has really come down. Jim Caron is expert at the CIO of Portfolio Solutions Group at Morgan Stanley. You take the Christmas field, Jim, you talk about naughty or nice in the real yield.
What is a level of the real yield that keeps asset inflation going?
So I think where the Fed wants to go with this, because what really matters is what they think. And I'm gonna talk about the policy the real policy yield. So this is a nominal FED funds rate minus inflation. I think that number is around one and a half percent,
so it's lower than what it is today. So if we look at nominal If we look at nominal FED funds today at five and a half percent, and let's say US inflation is at three, that means real policy rates are at two and a half percent, which means that the Fed could cut one hundred basis points just to get to their neutral level.
So I know we've been talking.
I've listened on the show that yes, there's like six rate cuts priced in, but remember one hundred basis points of those rate cuts is really just getting to neutral, right, and they don't start really easing until they start doing more than one hundred.
I did some fancy math, Jim, in honor of your attending today, on the standard deviation move of the Bloomberg Financial Conditions Index. We've gone from a commodative and this is not Stan Fisher one oh one, it's Tom Keene one on one. We're grossly accommodative. Well, how does it fed? Their degrees of freedom just seem to have shrunk because of the market statement on accommodation.
Right, So when we look at financial conditions, this is really a way for the FED to gauge how their monetary policy is impacting the broader markets, and there should be some feedback mechanism from markets to what their policy is actually saying. So the way that I think about this is that if the market's are rallying, that's okay with the FED. The FED doesn't have to push back on a rally because they don't like a rally.
That's not their job.
Effectively, what they're saying is can we get this rally and can inflation also stay low? And if the answer is yes to both, then they don't care. If the market continues the rally, they don't feel so they have to push back on that. And right now, the look through to inflation going forward. As you mentioned in the UK, we had a downside surprise in inflation. Inflation is coming
down in the US. As long as it does, then the FED is okay with higher equity prices, tighter credit spreads, and even easier financial conditions, as long as we don't get inflation starting to move higher.
Which is let's park that for a second. This idea that disinflation goldilocks this idea of the FED just simply cutting rate surgically in order to keep in tandem with where inflation is going and go to actually the fundamental
and earnings. And I wonder how much that is the real risk that people are not talking about right now, Given the fact that FedEx disappointed shares lower by some twelve percent in early and pre market trading, general mills retracting some of their full year forecast, downgrading it in response to lower sales, those shares falling even after an underwhel underwhelming performance, is this the theme of January that people are missing.
So that's a really good question, Lisa, because effectively we have to we have to think about the look through to this if the unemployment rate starts to rise, because that's what we're talking about when we're talking about earnings and missing earnings and things like this. What we're really saying, what an economist is really saying, is at what point do these companies start laying workers off and at what
point does that boost the unemployment rate. So what we're seeing at this point, at least the last data point in the unemployment rate, the unemployment rate has come down the labor market still remains relatively tight, and it's relatively strong. Yes it's softening, Yes we are seeing signs of softening, but we're not seeing signs of a collapse. So ultimately, some of these things are going to be somewhat cyclical. Some companies are going to post worse earning, some companies
is going to post better earnings. But if we look at the broad market, the story for December is actually not that these supercharged seven stocks are doing really well in tech. The story for December is that the market's actually broadening out, is that the other sectors, the other four hundred and ninety three stocks out of the S and P five hundred excluding those seven, are actually participating in the upside. So yes, it's not going to be
a straight line. It's going to be volatile. But the point here is that missing earnings is one thing, and that could be cyclical, and I get that sector by sector, But as long as it doesn't affect hiring and wages and things like that to the degree that it creates a deeper downturn and loss of consumption, then that's just markets.
Markets.
It sounds like you're pretty bullish, are you just telling clients to go all in that basically their biggest risk is missing out in the upside next year.
No, I'm not saying that.
Actually, you know, one of the things that we you know, we've been bullish, we've been positive, we've been overweight inequities all year, and right now, towards the end of this year, we're starting to think about reducing that and moving towards neutral. We haven't done it yet, but that's but that's probably our next step. And why that is is because everything that we thought about in late October November is actually
already come through by the end of the year. So we've got this like fifteen percent rally across the board inequities. We've got credit spreads a lot tighter, bond yels ten year yeelds are below four percent. I mean, my gosh, my year end forecast with a ten yure note not that I make a forecast, but it.
Was around four percent and we're already We're already there.
So I think a lot of that good news has been pulled forward, so we need another catalyst to get higher, and I'm I'd rather go to neutral, and I think neutral is the new defensive. So we can be tactical of the new year ahead because there will be dislocations.
Jim mccarr, that's a question for those trying to recover from the bond tobaccle use negative ten degrees at Boden. You were studying physics, you go, oh, kel Tech, that may be warm, so you go out to kel Tech to get some decent weather and aeronautical engineering. Okay, great, are these gl glide pass of stability and do they indicate the dividend growth is a proxy for yield forward? That back and forth between your world of bonds inequities is a yield alternative? Can that be possible?
So I think it can be possible. I don't see it as highly probable. And the thing that I'm concerned about the most is that I do think that twenty twenty four will be a very rocky year. So I know we're talking about these glidepaths and soft landings. We may ultimately get a mild slow down or a mild recession, which would be characterized as a soft landing. But I I think it's a really dangerous landing at this point, and it's one of the reasons why I think that we need to engage in more of.
A balanced portfolio approach.
So have some fixing income, have some equity, have some growth, have some value, and just real quick.
Jare before we run out of time, what do you mean by dangerous landing?
So I think there's more geopolitical tensions and more geopolitical risks that are out there to start this year.
Than last year.
We have obviously, you know, China, Taiwan, we have Taiwan elections, we have a US presidential election. I think that's going to create a lot of volatility, and I think the markets are and don't forget, we have the twenty twenty five you know, the Trump tax cuts come come due in twenty twenty five. At some point in twenty twenty four, we're going to start to price the outcome of that in and that can swing the markets from an earning
perspective quite a bit and from a multiple perspective. So I think let's just enjoy this calumn right now, because I think it's going to get a lot rockier and a lot less, a lot more uncertain into the future.
Jim Karen, thank you. With Morgan Stanley there on your total return and ability to clip a coupon.
With a growing iPhone business into next year on the heels of what we view as a new tech bullmarket beginning, Apple is poised to have a strong year ahead.
Teak interesting and of course he's been all over the media, but also he's been right right right, As I mentioned, Neil duddis maybe my economist of the year on the cell side, get into magnificent seven, right, nobody's been as visible and articulate as mister ives he holds court at Wedbush. I want to go to the morning's valuation where you give me a half assed sum of the parts. You've got the service sector at the one point five trillion of four trillion, which is two hundred and fifty seven
dollars per share. What's the total some of the parts? Is it above two fifty seven twelve months out?
Yeah, it's closer to three hundred some of the party.
I just can't go to five trillion because you don't want to, you know, be inflammatory.
Well, the big thing is really the services is going to be the key over the next year. The rerating that we're going to see an Apple, I think numbers moving higher is gonna be services driven. I think that's where the one point five to one point six trillion comes in. But I do think what's starting to happen now, you know, despite what John in terms of like some of the China issues, you're now seeing unit growth come up.
ASP's going up to me right now in Cooper Tino, they're popping the champagne, getting ready for a phenomenal year ahead.
Buried in the CFA is a is a Barbelle, and one is are you running is a revenue growth story? Or are you running as a profit making story? To me, Apple is almost out of Graham, Dot and Coddle. They're running this thing for.
Profit right, and that's how. That's how cook is what jobs did, It's how they've done it. But I think the difference to your point, it's the monization. The install bas is on parallel two billion iOS devices.
So now if them are in my house, continue exactly.
And look and you're one of the cross selling opportunity for Cooking.
And the thing is is that now what's starting to happen is that if you look at the services piece and you look at the penetration, the average Apple customer is still twenty to twenty five percent penetrate from a services perspective.
That's going to continue to up. And then I believe the big thing here is the AI app store that I think they introduced over the next year. That's going to be the new shiny object.
Okay, before we get to the new shiny object, let's talk about the old shiny object, the iPhone. If I told you where revenue was and where it would be at the start of the year for the end of the year, would you have said the stock was up fifty two percent year today?
Yeah?
So okay, So what I'd say is that part has definitely been an upside surprise in terms of where the stock I think the difference it really rests on the services business and what I believe is the margin story.
So even though from a unit perspective there have been some choppiness over the last quarter or two, if you look at the margins, I mean, so they've been able to expand grew as margins in this environment, which I know we've talked about a lot of this on the show, but that just shows that they have control over their ecosystem. From a chip perspective, that's been a key.
To the bull You think they can go ex growth but still Retina growth multiple.
I think they this past year they were able to go ex growth and get the growth multiple. This next year, the renaissance of growth happens in Cooper Tino on services back double digits unit from an iPhone unit perspective continues to i'll say single digits. And the China story, despite all the worries, despite many yelling fire in a crowded theater, We're going to see China growth.
So exactly, fire and a crowded theater. Whatever keeps piling in. But I am wondering if you see growth coming mostly from the United States, or if that's international growth, where does it come from in a pretty competitive landscape.
I think seventy percent of its US and Europe thirty percent of the growth. The incremental growth is in China because at least if you look at it today, one hundred million iPhones in China have not been upgraded three years. So even with Huawei and what even in Huawei and what we're seeing the actual penetration the upgrade opportunity, I'll
call it essentially a mini supercycle that's playing out. Look as of twenty four hours ago, are Asia checks showing no cuts and I think that's very important.
Because you said exactly the same thing twelve months ago and it didn't happen. Where is this upgrade supercycle?
Okay, so now to that point, the upgrade cycle has under the radar been happening.
But at some point that you sit there and say that these phones haven't been upgraded for a reason, and then maybe they're not going to be upgraded.
But the look, and I know it's a great point that you've brought up from an upgrade cycle. I think the difference is is that the last eighteen months, maybe the upgrades have been in a slower piece, but they've gained one hundred million new iPhones in the last eighteen months, So I think if maybe we've been right for the wrong reasons wherever you want to call it, is like the upgrade opportunity, we admit has definitely been a little
more subdued this year than we would have expected. But on the upside, what we didn't expect is that the Android market share games they've gotten have been a fox to muscles moment.
There's no doubt you've been right. I just want to get into the reasoning. Suret it you know that, but you have been right. The stock is up fifty two percent year today. I can't argue with that. We talk about the watch just briefly, telling Father Christmas he can't deliver presence on December twenty sixth. It's not a big deal.
I just wonder the gift from the regulator from your point of view, to turn around to Apple and say can't sell the eyewatch from December twenty fifth, I mean, what does that actually do?
What does that achieve when the red phone rings and it's Cook and Cooper Tino.
That's what you think that made a difference, The fact this was Apple. You think that's actually made a difference that it regulates.
When I think Apple just brings the different prier and we see it in terms of big tech, and it's one where the even within Europe and when we see continue map Brussels and even in the US, there's a recognition where you don't want to poke the bear like in other words, like to actually do this in a holiday season, to go let's say December fifteenth would have been much more drastic than obviously going Christmas Eve. But
this is Look, this is not ending. They're going to continue to have patent issues and battles on the healthcare's front.
Are they really a proletariat issue though? When they're charging fourteen hundred dollars for an iPhone? I mean, is this is sort of going to become an issue if margins are too big and they do get the nods from the regulators at a time of souring economic backdrop, does that become a real pressure point of just how much those margins could keep expanding.
Look, I think margins continue to expand because from a chip perspective, they own their own ecosystem, and that's really been the That's and Key's talk about. That's a huge part of the opportunity in terms of just gaining more and more margins. But from a regulator perspective, they're like, look, I'm more focused on the cappuccino this morning than regulators in Europe because that continues to just be noise, not real.
You sound like a man who's got stocks up fifty this year.
Yes, clearly for radio You're not getting the full joys this because Dan Eyes is dressed like a pinata this morning. You are the bear market pinata that's out there. They love going after you, and to me, the heart of the matter and I'm gonna go back to Graham, Dodd and Coddle. Ibada twenty nineteen, twenty nine percent margin, Ibata right now thirty three percent margin. Where's that ibadad margin? In four years?
That's getting toward forty percent?
And I think that you're gonna give me an Ebatha forty percent.
I believe because as services becomes a bigger piece the margins on that's double the hardware business. So is they further out? If you're a bull right now, you're not looking next year, you look in next two to three years. It's a cash flow machine margin When you look toward twenty twenty five, twenty twenty six, this is one where it's gonna continue moving that direction.
Okay, you've got thirty seconds. You're gonna tell me now, what on earth is an AI app store?
What is that?
There's gonna be a separate app store in Apple. That's gonna be health. It's gonna be health fitness. AI apps. Developers are gonna build that Apple will have it's gonna be an offshoot of the app store, an AI app store. And right now it's all about developers. That's the hearts and lungs of Cooper Tina, the.
Hearts and lungs. Here's radio is not taking all this in. You got the day glot, pink sneakers, the lime green lime sorbete pants. You got the lavender thing going up top. He looks like a pigon shuit punch back.
He was wearing leopard print dog mountains the other day.
Well, that's but I respected Doc mart It's aggressive, but he could pull it off.
It's aggressive, it's aggressives. Congratulations, Thanks, you were right to be, Thanks.
Went Bush.
One of the great doers in our international relations is Aaron David Miller's thesis was searched for security centering on Saudi Arabia's senior fellow at the Carnegian Endowment for International Peace. Aaron, you have written about the stretch of sea which to us is romantic, indeed biblical, the Red Sea. What is distinctive about the Red Sea and Yemen?
It's turned into a choke point frankly, and you refer to the region's centrality in both the fifty six Wars sixty seven. You now have a situation in which an extremist, once ragtag militia driven by ideology, the huthis now run by one of the founder sons, up Del Malakuthi, has turned this organization into a significant threat proto state which controls one air capital in Sanna, who is now control a part of the country which contains Yemen, which contains
a third of the population of the entire nation. And rather than being sort of wholly owned subsidiaries by Iran, they are willing participants, driven by theology common affinity. They're both twelve ver Shia, just like the Iranians, inspired by the Iranian Revolution. They now thanks to technology now drones are being manufactured by the Houthis. They now have presented themselves as an actor certainly now in the regional stage. And given Kirby's comment.
The relation doctor Miller the relationship of Saudia Arabia with some form of recent peace agreement with the Hoosies, but I don't buy it for a minute. Triangulate our interests with these rebels, with Saudi Arabia and Riyod.
Well, the Saudi's right now do not want an escalation, given the fact that Mohammed bin Selman's plans for twenty thirty have now been in some respect undermined by regional instability caused by the Israel Hamas war. Sadis are trying to find a way to extricate themselves from Yemen. They fought the Huthis unsuccessfully. They may actually energized a Huthi caused by any number of Arrant air strikes which killed
the hundreds, if not thousands, of Yemeni's. So I think the Saudis don't want a US escalation with the Houthis either do the Omanis, who are serving as a sort of bridge. Look you look and see the maritime task force that Secretary Austin tried to assemble. You've got seven nations. The only regional nation that agreed to participate is Bahrain, and that's considered a sort of consolation prize given their
relationship with Saudi Arabia. So the Arab States seemed very reluctant as long as the Israeli go as a war goes on to join in in an American effort to suppress a group that is actually even more than his volah launching an actual short range ballistic missile in Israel's direction. This is a This is going to be a huge problem because our options here are not great. We can go through them, if you want, But in terms of deterrence,
we're already past that. But who the these don't seem to be able to be deterred right now.
Ered what you just said there was fascinating that the Middle Eastern allies traditionally with the United States are not getting involved because of the war between Israel and Hamas. Is this sort of Aran taking this opportunity to direct the Huthis to do this to exploit the weakness, the lack of ties right now between Riad and Washington DC.
I think that, yeah, I mean some of argued that the one of the key motivators of the Hamas Terra surge on October seven as a sort of pro Irani and pro Hamas effort to undermine a relationship Israel Saudi US that could have created a whole new security architecture in the region. I mean, we're prepared, apparently, and don't get me started on this to basically conclude a mutual defense pact with Saudi Arabia in an effort to facilitate
this normalization process. We haven't done that since we amended the US Japan Security Treaty in nineteen sixty. So yeah, this was I think a part of Iran's calculation to chill that relationship that was emerging and ultimately undermine it. And who these have the same motivation.
Which to me really raises this question, Okay, how much does this add to the urgency of getting some resolution to the war between Israel and Hamas that seems to maybe be entering a new phase but doesn't seem close to a resolution.
It's important point. You know, it's now global trade, it's now supply chain, it's now Christmas. I mean ten to fifteen percent of global trade through the Red Sea in Suice Canal three week delay and BP has already pulled their red sea operational trade from that region. You have to go around the Cape of Good Hope. That adds another three weeks to a month. I mean, this could if it truly began to cause other private companies basically to pull out of the red sea trade, have a
big impact. I just don't think it's going to affect either Israel's or Hamas's calculator. That's being driven by a whole new, whole different set of dynamics.
And David Miller. If we decide to become more offensive against these whatever they are, terroristies, who's these whatever you want to call them. Is that a decision of defense? Is that a decision of state and defense? State? Is it decided at sixteen under Pennsylvania? How do we change us thrust politically in Washington.
Sixteen hundred Pennsylvania? I mean the options I'm totally already on the table. You could have armed escorts, but we don't have enough warships. You could create a corridor with a sort of a anti drone anti missile bubble above them. But remember every time the Huthis launch a two thousand dollars drone, we respond with interceptors that cost two million dollars. And the Pentagon is already concerned about the expense of waging war. I think the only real deterrence would be
strikes against hoothy assets in Yemen. Yeah, and quite the fact that they've launched thirty eight drones and any number of missiles we've just intercepted. I don't think there's a real drive on the part of the administration to go there, although.
You good to leave it there. Aaron David Miller, thank you so much for the briefing with the Carnigian DOMA can't say enough about his writings over the recess decades as well. Subscribe to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast on Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live every weekday starting at seven am Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the iHeartRadio app tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You can watch us live on Bloomberg Television and always
on the Bloomberg Terminal. Thanks for listening. I'm Tom Keen, and this is Bloomberg