Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics from our global headquarters in New York City. We are live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.
You and Nuclear Watchdog Saying in Richmond.
Facilities in Iran have taken direct military strikes.
Joining us now is I'm so pleased to.
Say the IAEA Director General, Raphael Grossi, Director General, You've had a very busy couple of weeks.
Thank you so much for making time for us.
I wanted to start with what damage has been done and what remains operational in Iran.
Well, thank you very much. A pleasure to be with you.
There has been a number of There have been a
number of attacks since the beginning of the operation. First of all, a very important facility in Athans was badly hit with a full enrichment operating hall being destroyed completely above ground means that it means then the electrical substation and power infrastructure in this big facility also being taken out with a direct impact on a very important underground enrichment facility which is which is also there because of the sudden loss of power that caused of course immediate
damage to these very delicate systems that the ultra centrifugues that produce the enriched uranium are.
So this is one thing.
Is Soahan, another very important nuclear compound which was repeatedly hit with a few buildings being affected. The one that has not sustained a similar degree of damage seems to be so far a very important facility which is also has the most important and sensitive parts secuted underground deep in the mountains, which is the facility at four door today.
So you mentioned Isfahan, So if I could just jump in, is the four hundred and nine kilogram stockpile of highly urined uranium still safely underground and that site.
Well, to say safely, I'm not so sure what could be could be the case.
Let me say, let me say one thing.
Which is very very important. It is it is in principle, it is there. It is stored there, as you can imagine, at a time of war. At a time of war, all nuclear sites are closed, so are in inspecters who are still i must say still in Iran, although they are in a protected place as you can imagine, but they are not inspecting no inspection, normal activity can take place.
We assume we have not seen anything that would suggest that the stockpile has been moved, but of course this might need to be reconfirmed as soon as we have access. One has to say that Iran is aware of the fact that this stockpile needs to be there under iaa constant supervision.
Well, even before hostilities began, Iran had told you they would implement special measures to protect its enriched uranium stockpile. What specifically are those special measures and how are they impacting your team that's on the ground.
We don't know.
We have been informed, as you rightly say, and I was also totally one of my last personal meetings with a foreign minister, doctor Abbas ACTI, that in case something happened, Iran would take measures to protect its material, equipment and so forth. But we haven't been informed of anything in detail.
We have reminded, and I have personally reminded in a letter to Foreign Minister or ACGLY that there are obligations that need to be observed and that of course we would be available in case they want to share with us, as they should, what they are planning to do. If they are planning to do anything, we don't know what these protective additional measures could be.
Even before the hostilities. We know.
Your inspectors also reported that there was no systemic weapons programmed. Does that mean that no smoking gun existed to justify what we're seeing right now with preemptive invasion, Well, I.
Don't know the metric of a smoking gun. How you would define that.
To making a nuclear weapons?
I have said, let me get to that.
I have said that no country in the world is enriching uranium at this level of sixty percent, which is technically almost equivalent of ninety percent, which is needed to have a nuclear weapon.
At the same time, we are inspectors.
We are not political analysts or national political officials, so we have to have concrete proof in order to say that there is an active program to make a nuclear weapon which we have not seen. That doesn't mean that doesn't mean that they are in a territory which is of concern, and this is the reason why there is international concern. Why I had a very i would say serious report that I presented, as you may know, to the Board of Governors of the EYE a few days ago.
I should also mention that in my conversations with my Iranian counter counterparts, they have always reminded that there is a fatua from the leader saying that no nuclear weapon would be compatible with Islam and things like that. But at the same time I have told them that many high officials have said that Iran has all the pieces of the puzzle, so to speak. So there has been a lot of ambiguity, and this is never good.
Director General, There's a real question about what type of nuclear risk there is should there be some sort of explosion at some of these facilities. I know you've been directing a number of studies on this.
What if you detected so far?
And how concerned are you that a direct strike on Photo in particular could release nuclear material into the environment.
Well, there could be, of course a release. We are following as good and as much as we can every military activity and assessing.
The radiological impact of those.
For example, I informed that in Natans, this facility that sustained the most I would say serious damage. There has been some contamination, but it is contained inside the perimeter if you want, of the facility, so there is no immediate danger for the population. Then if you move to a higher amount of material like for example, these highly enriched uranium and more, because there is not only let's not forget, there's not only the sixty percent, there's the
five percent stop pile, there's the twenty percent stockpile. There's a lot of nuclear material around in the country. And of course a direct impact would have a radiological sequences which would be commensurate with the attack. So this is why I must I unfortunately cannot be as precise as I would like to, because it would depend if only a part of it is affected or more. But certainly, certainly the possibility of a radiological impact environmental impact exists.
And as you also know, there are other facilities, including a nuclear power plant in Iran, which of course should never be touched because this could be another level of.
Concern and environmental damage. So this is where this is what we see at.
The moment, Director General.
This is one reason why some people have speculated that there has been hesitance by Israelis as well as by the United States truly dropping some of the bunker bombers and other types of military equipment to try to destroy some of this weaponry. Do you think that this is actually a real risk, the sort of release potentially of radiological material into the environment that you think people are taking seriously. Have you had conversations with the US or Israel.
Well, we have reminded everyone not that we need to be honest, because I think in the United States, you are the leading country in nuclear science and technology in the world. So I think there is complete awareness. And also in Israel and in Iran, and in the region and in Europe. I'm talking to and I would say in the Gulf States, I'm getting lots of calls from high officials, ministers, prime ministers. They are all very, very concerned about this probability. And I think, of course, I'm
a diplomat, I'm not private to military decision making. But I want to believe and I think this should be the case that the potential radiological consequences of any military action is well taken into into account. But it's important is to return to the diplomatic to the diplomatic table as soon as possible, because what it's a state is very.
Serious given the hostilities.
Can you just walk us through the gap that exists from your inspectors and how potentially what the i a e a does every single day is being degraded.
Well, obviously, I think nothing will be like in the past. We have crossed the line in the sense that there is a there is a war. There is a military conflict which has been triggered rightly or wrongly, on the assumption of certain nuclear.
Activities taking place in Iran.
And all these facilities which are or where the facilities that the i a e a. Inspectors were looking at day by day, some of them have been destroyed, some of them have been affected, and we do not know what the future holds in terms of what may happen over the next few days.
So there will, of course there will be a reshuffle.
We will continue inspecting and carrying out our activities, but that will be and I think we have to be realistic about this. That will be a function of the political and military evolution. Iran has said, and you mentioned this just now in our conversation. Iran has said that
they might take additional measures. There are people in Iran saying, for example, which I hope will not be the case, that Iran should leave the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and expelled the IAEA, as it was the case in North Korea, as you remember a few years ago. So here, I think is a big political scenario unfolding which will hold a lot of events that we will have to take into consideration for international peace and security in the region and in the world.
Quite obviously, IAEA Director General Raphael Grossi, thank you so much for spending time with us amid this conflict that I know you are closely following. Here's the latest markets awaiting the FED rate decision out later today. The consensus widely expecting the FED to hold rate steady, but updated economic forecast, which might be the most interesting part.
Former Saint Louis.
FED President Jim Bullard joins us now for more. Jim, so glad that you could join us.
Thank you.
I want to start with why would they say anything today at all? Can they avoid I guess his better question, can they avoid saying anything at a time where there is so much uncertainty?
Yeah?
Well, the FEDS certainly not taking the headlines today with the war in the Middle East, so that might play to their benefit. I don't think they would have said too much anyway. I do think there is the SEP coming out, and this will be the first SEP post April seconds, and so I think it will be a more stagflationary SVP, and I think markets are already anticipating that, but there is some room there for surprise depending on
where that goes. And so I think during the Chairs press conference, he'll want to be talking about the SEP.
Well, yeah, the idea of whether they do downgrade growth and increase their expectations for inflation at the same time, how do they respond with the dot plot, how do they respond with the reaction function?
And that's really the ultimate question.
Do they place the emphasis on inflation or do they place the emphasis on the slowing growth and potential hits the labor market. Do you have a sense, Jim, of whether the Fed this FED is more focused on inflation than growth or if their focus is shifting just a little more with some of the weakening data that we've seen over the past couple of weeks.
Well, that's why this will be moderately interesting. I think you've also got comments from many members of the committee, But I think that if it was me, I'd be talking about slower growth due to the trade war, because that's what happened in twenty eighteen twenty nineteen, and I'd play down the inflation effects because I didn't really see
too much in that earlier trade war. In fact, course, PC inflation actually declined in the first half of twenty nineteen, and by the time you got to the summer of twenty nineteen, that economy.
Was slower and the FED lowered the policy rate.
So I think the baseline would be here to get to September and make a judgment there about how they want to play this for the rest of twenty twenty five.
Well, Jim, given your analysis and given the actual hard day that we have seen with inflation coming down in the past four prints, why wouldn't the FED be cutting today or do you think they would if they weren't so concerned about the uncertainty from policymakers in Washington.
Yeah, I mean, I think one thing is just to get past this deadline, the ninety day deadline on trade deals, and see what comes out of that whether that would be extended or whether there would just be deal set or preliminary deal set. I think that would provide a lot of information to the committee. Also, the data on
the economy has been reasonably good. Looks like second quarter GDP now is I just checked it three and a half percent, So that'll off set a week first quarter and keep the first half on average around two percent or a little below two percent growth. So you're okay on that. A lot of the other indicators are pretty good.
Core PC inflation or dallas FTRIM mean about two and a half a half percent on an annual basis is still a little bit high, and so I think the committees probably got about the right stance here.
But they can decide to do something a little bit.
Later in the year, or if the data do come in in an adverse way, they can push things off to twenty twenty six.
There's another point of consternation as well at this meeting, and of course that's the hostilities going on between Israel and Iran and the concern that there's going to be prolonged elevated oil prices.
How does the FED deal with this?
Yeah, Well, price shocks are always always vexing. From the FED point of view, I think the response so far has been muted. Considering that this is open warfare between Israel and Iran.
I think Iran militarily.
Speaking, doesn't look like they're in a very good position here. So possibly we get some kind of resolution one way or another, and markets are.
Waiting to see where that's going to come out. But it certainly does.
Affect headline inflation, does affect what people actually pay at the pump and in the US and so and around the world, and so that's definitely.
A factor, Jim.
As we look ahead, a lot of people are saying that this is increasingly a lame duck FED chair and that after he is gone, there's going to be someone new in his seat who will be a lot more dubvish. How realistic do you think that that actually is?
Well, one share at a time, and it's really the committee that makes policy. It's not really any one person. Certainly Chair PubL guides the committee, but.
It's having been on it.
There's many people with their own staffs and their own analysis, and they've got their own ideas about where policy should go.
I do think that the committee's.
Smarter than any one person on the committee, and it really pays off to have a lot of different viewpoints as you're trying to make reason judgments where to take monetary policy for the United States.
Jim, do you.
Think that most of the committee members agree with you that they should be taking the slowing growth more into consideration than the inflationary potential shock given the fact that they haven't really seen it yet, or do you think that they are focusing on what some people have said is fighting the last war, which is inflation that got maybe a little away from them.
Yeah, it's a little bit. I think about half the committee. It's once burned twice shy. I think they really don't want to let anything occur that would send inflation expectations meaningfully higher. You do have these survey based expectations. Those seem to have a big political element to them, and so I think you have to discard them right now. The tips market five year tips inflation compensation about two
thirty two today trading right in that area. So that sounds pretty good for a five year outlook on inflation. And if you think some of that's a little bit of risk premium, so market is pretty confident as the FED will hit the inflation target over the five year horizon, which is really about the best you can do as far as the FED.
Former Saint Louis FED President jimbull Ard, thank you so much for being with us.
Recovery of black Rock. Writing this.
The Federal keep rates on hold and highlight elevated uncertainty.
No surprise there.
All eyes will be on the statement of economic projections. Gargee joins us. Now for more gargy. How focused are you on the FED? How focused are you on the geopolitics? How do you sort of weigh the two?
Absolutely, good morning, great to be here. Usually, you know, the saying goes the marketing can only focus on one thing at a time, and we've had many one things this year. Obviously oil prices, the impact of geopolitics, what that might do to headline inflation to consumer, that's top of mind, but I wouldn't. I mean, obviously this is an SEP FED meeting. I think that's also going to
be important. In particular whether they're going to hint at two more rate cuts or just one more I think that is relevant.
And at the same.
Time, how they handled all this additional uncertainty to your drinking blood game. I think all of that is going to weigh on them. So I think both are going to be important. But obviously the market is the most important thing right now for both the humans involved, as well as oil prices and broader risks off in the markets, even for a short term. Is certainly the geopolitics in the Middle East.
And just to be clear, the drinking game is with water.
We all should be hydrated, So clearly that is where we're going online. But there is this question going forward about how much this economy needs that kind of support versus has some sort of threat, not necessarily of overheating, but facing a real sticky inflation that could.
Be really punitive.
I'm just wondering from your perspective, and the message from markets aren't equity is telling us that actually there is no problem, even though the economic data might suggest otherwise.
So time and again we've seen that when there is geopolitical uncertainty in the markets, yes, we see that spike and oil prices. Historically this has been a great time to be diversified into products like gold, because that has been an excellent diversifier. But historically what we've seen is that the three month forward or even the one month forward on high quality parts of equity markets. They have
looked through geopolitical uncertainty. However, I think as we go into two and two thirty pm today, let's take a look back of what we've gotten since the May sixth,
May seventh FOMC last meeting. Inflation has been you know, there have been no impacts of tariffs yet yesterday, I think the most important thing was around the weakness of retail sales and global ip that is softening, and I think that is important and perhaps had some lot of an impact on price action in markets yesterday, and I think the FED recognizes that and more importantly at eight thirty today, initial jobless claims and the continuing claims that
have ever so slightly gotten worse. I think those are the important things that we should all be looking forward to. But at the same time, like we've seen before, the market does tend to sort of look through neo term shifts in volatility, and I think the macro picture for now is still not too weak, so equities or especially quality equities and AI equities are probably going to be okay.
But gardy is that a mistake?
For all we know the president right now is still weighing his options, and one of those options is a strike.
You know, one of those options is a strike. The market always responds in probabilities, not binary outcomes, So let's think about the probability of that. Yes, that's the headlines right now, with the surrender headlines from yesterday, for the US to get involved, for retaliatory retaliatory strikes to come through. I think that's going to be a big thing for
the markets. Absolutely. And that's again why I would suggest that if you're listening to this right now, if you're an investor, having diversifying stuff in your portfolio, having diversifying asset classes like international equities, having some bonds in the front end of the curve and the belly of the curve, having things like gold and having inflation protection is really important.
How much have you been advocating for more gold and our portfolio since Trump took office.
I won't say it's to do with Trump. I think that we were talking about gold even if you think back to last year, just as another way in which you can diversify against people moving away other countries moving away from the US dollar. It's certainly a geopolitical risk, and by the way, we've been faced with geopolitical risk much before November twenty twenty four. This was something that has the geopolitical fragmentation we're seeing wars in the up Pakistan, Israel,
Gaza and now of course with Iran. That's been going on for some time. So we've been talking about that, and I think it's a balast and a portfolio that investors need.
I'm going to put you on the spot, so I apologize in advance. But a lot of people have been talking about stock selection, and they've been talking about the importance of going away from indexes.
And moving into companies.
We're not focusing necessarily on big existential risk, but you're focusing on AI adoption, or you're focusing on the fact that people are eating more.
Breadsticks at this particular company.
How much is that challenging some of the ETF landscape and the indexing landscape.
They got a lot of popularity at.
A time where there was a much more beta type a trend rather than this sort of alpha aspect of the conversations we have today.
Absolutely not a challenge at all. Actually, when we think about where black Rock has been able to garner the most amount of flows. It is investors more and more adopting active ETFs. Exactly. The trend that you're portraying is playing out in the markets where activetfs such as BAI that focuses on AI in an active manner because obviously
you can't just set it and forget about it. Things like bink, which is flexible fixed income where you're focusing on harnessing income in the markets, those have been so popular that pickers investors are recognizing the need to be dynamic as well as quite nimble in this environment. Having said that, for many investors who are just entering the markets that need to understand the market is theirs to own. Perhaps owning just a simple index is a very good
first step to be in the markets. And frankly, when we look at the flows, there's a tremendous amount of inflows to products like bitcoin for example, ibit one of the it's obviously an index product, but something that has gonered huge amount of inflows, yurtel date and products like the very front end of the fixed income markets with ASGOV.
So there is a place for both, but absolutely no doubt investors are focusing on more and more bespoke ways to access the market with active fixed income and active equity ETF.
Bitcoin ETF in tandem with the gold ETF.
I just wonder, how do you have bitcoin?
That's the underlying to an ETF that people we can get.
In that gargiechattery and flat round. Thank you so much.
Joining us now is Claudius Sum of New Century Advisors. Claudia, great to see you, Thank you so much for being with us. I want to start with this idea that the weight and see FED doesn't have to tell us anything. A lot of people would argue and push back and say, actually, they have to give us a sense of what their scenario analysis looks like at a time or potentially that it could increase their chance of stagflation. What's your sense
of what their scenario analysis looks like. What's their response mechanism to that?
Right?
I think that'll be a really important part of the press conference today is to have how talk through the risks the scenarios that the FED is considering. Unfortunately, their tools, like the Summary of Economic Projections, the way it's put together right now, doesn't do a great job of getting you know, scenarios across, but it is so clear that the FED is in risk management mode, right, this is about where inflation could go, how it could persist, and that you know, this is this is kind of an
insurance pause, right. They want to avoid those risk outcomes. And so then it is a big part of explaining why why is it you're on hold? Inflation's coming down, you know, why aren't you cutting now? So I think they really do need to kind of spell that out and give us a sense of what they're looking for in the data as it's coming in.
What potential damage could they do if they are too late and they should be cutting because inflation's coming down.
Well, it's it's unnecessary weakness on the economy. I mean, if you look at interest rate sensitive sectors like the housing market, the higher rates they are having an effect, right, They're having a on people who are out there trying to buy homes, builders who are trying to you know, construct new housing.
So you know, if like that, that is a pain.
It may be necessary to keep inflation under control, to keep inflation expectations under control, but there is a cost, right, and I think the Fed is balancing that well. But it is something that should be communicated because otherwise, just if you look at the data on hand and you think of the data driven FED, it's like, well, why aren't you starting to cut or even talking about cutting?
Like they're really not just going to pause today, They're going to push that pause pretty hard through probably much of the rest of this year.
It sounds like you think Chair Powell is going to be hawkish today. We just got to know from Andrew Holland, Horse of City, and he said there's three reasons for Powell to be dubbish. One three months of softer core inflation. Two rising jobless claims, continuing jobless claims and softer housing data.
Do you think his rhetoric is.
Going to lean hawkish when a lot of people think he should actually come out and sound a bit dubbish?
Yeah, I mean it's I think a lot of it comes down to how to me. One big question to listen to how today is to explain, you know that inflation data in the last four months that's been unexpectedly soft.
What's that about, right, Because.
If it comes a hawkish tone to me would be saying, oh, well, the terriff inflation is still coming.
We just it's timing. We just need to wait, it's coming.
But you know there's you can look at that data and see some nuance not just from what you think are teriff effects, but just inflation in general, where it's like, man, the demands a little softer. Maybe this isn't pushing through like anything that he would say today that would kind of soften or push against all of these upside risk to inflation to me would.
I think be pretty balanced. But you know, we'll just have to see where he says.
And one difficult thing today with listening to Howe is understanding that you know he is speaking for the FEC.
That's what he does, is fed shair.
He has his interpretation of it as well, and he probably will be in something of a live debate with the dot plot and the summary projection, so it's kind of tough to parse it on days where we get like these forecasts.
In addition to him speaking.
I love that a live debate with him basically arguing the side of everyone on the committee and trying to sort of come out somewhere in the middle. I'm struck by what's keep some people keep on saying, which is a number of members of this committee are fighting the last war. They are so scarred from the use of transitory and failing to curtail inflation a couple of years ago, that they are more willing to look through any weakness
in the labor market in order to prioritize inflation. Do you expect that to be the same today, which is the reason why people are expecting more of.
A hawkish tone.
I think we'll continue to see the focus of the informc on the inflation risks, on inflation going higher. Again, the claims data today didn't reinforce any kind of an emergency, and we aren't four point two percent unemployment right like, we aren't a full employment economy, so.
We're starting from a good place.
Inflation still somewhat elevated, and just everything we've gone in terms of the data, and then, like you said, kind of fighting the last war, the inflation risk just loomed really large. But as we're just seeing how they're interpreting the data, how they're questioning their own assumptions about you know, inflation could really get out of hand. I think that's the piece, you know, that would be really important to understand.
If if they're focused on the current threats to the economy as opposed to the threats we had four years ago.
Claudia Sam of New Central Advisors, thank you so much for being with us. Really appreciate your insights.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast, bringing you the best in markets, economics, angiopolitics. You can watch the show live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, or anywhere else you listen, and as always, on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.