Russia

Executive Summary   The surge in food prices following Russia's invasion of Ukraine will drive EM headline inflation higher, given more of individuals' incomes in these economies are spent on food. Economies in the MENA will remain at risk for higher food prices, given their reliance on wheat imports from Ukraine and Russia, which together comprise ~ 30% of global wheat exports.  Wheat is the most widely traded grain in the world; its production is second only to that of corn.  Higher shipping and input costs – especially for fertilizers – will exacerbate the upside price pressure on grains, particularly wheat. Tenuous social contracts raise the risk of social unrest in MENA reminiscent of the Arab Spring unrest of 2011, which was fueled by food scarcity, economic stagnation and popular anger at autocratic governments. A strong USD will continue to raise the local-currency cost of grains and food, which also will fuel EM inflation. The War Increased Food Prices… Bottom Line: Wheat prices will remain volatile with a bias to the upside for as long as the Russia-Ukraine war persists.  The uncertain evolution of this war means EM states will be more exposed to grain-price volatility and higher inflation.  This could prove to be destabilizing to MENA states in particular.  Separately, we update our recommendations below.  Feature High food prices will drive EM headline inflation, owing to the fact a higher proportion of individuals’ incomes in these economies are spent on food. These pressures are particularly acute for wheat following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyCopper Demand Will Ignore Recession Wheat is the most widely traded grain in the world, according to the World Population Review (WPR).1 In terms of global production, it is second only to corn, totaling 760mm tons in 2020. In order, the top three wheat producers in the world are China, India, and Russia, which account for 41% of global output. The US is the fourth-largest producer. The WPR notes that if the EU were to be counted as a single country, its wheat production would be second only to China (Chart 1). Within emerging markets, the Middle East and North African (MENA) nations will be worst hit by rising wheat prices.2 This is because the bulk of their wheat imports are sourced from Russia and Ukraine, and shipped from Black Sea ports, which are literally caught in the crosshairs of the Russia-Ukraine war. Many of these states do not have sufficient grain reserves to tide themselves over this crisis, and will be forced to import food at elevated prices. A strong USD, which this past week hit a 19-year high, will add to the price of USD-denominated commodity imports, particularly wheat. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will continue to exacerbate EM food scarcity and drive input costs – e.g., fertilizers – and shipping rates higher. This will keep food and wheat prices volatile with a strong bias to the upside (Chart 2). Chart 1Wheat Production Faces Concentration Risk Chart 2The War Increased Food Prices… In addition to the inflation risk from high food and energy prices, the tenuous social contracts in many states again raises the risk of social unrest in MENA, as occurred in the 2011 Arab Spring protests against food scarcity, economic stagnation and autocratic government.3 War Disruptions Will Continue Russia’s invasion of Ukraine jeopardized wheat supply from two countries which together constitute nearly 30% of total global wheat exports. The invasion will continue to keep wheat prices volatile and biased to the upside (Chart 3). The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) forecasts Ukraine’s 2021/22 wheat output will drop below its 5-year average, since at least 20% of total arable land cannot be used due to the war. While nearly 60% lower than this time last year, Ukrainian wheat exports in March were not completely shut down. However, they were re-routed around the direct routes from the Black Sea.4 In March, Ukraine managed to export 309k tons of wheat. Chart 3...Particularly Wheat Ukraine will need to rely on these convoluted routes until port services are either restored or unblocked. Exports through more circuitous routes will delay distribution and increase transport costs. This, of course, also adds to the delivered cost of wheat that is being rerouted and slows the overall distribution of grains globally. Additionally, Ukrainian exports via other countries will be disrupted by those countries’ own trade slowdowns, since global bottlenecks affects all trade. Thus far, Russia has been able to maintain wheat exports. Russia continued to supply wheat to global markets in March and April. The USDA estimates that during the 2021/22 crop year, which ends in June, Russian wheat exports will total 33mm tons, which is just 2mm tons lower than the USDA's pre-crisis estimate.5 Because of high carryover stocks and record production, Russia's exports in the 2022/23 crop year are expected to be more than 40mm tons. Sourcing Alternative Wheat Supplies With a sizable portion of global wheat supply at risk – primarily from Ukraine – other exporting countries will need to increase output to fill this gap (Chart 4). This production, however, is not guaranteed, as it depends primarily on weather and fertilizer prices. New trade routes will also need to be created. This will tax existing export infrastructures as shipping dynamics are reconfigured. Particularly important will be how far the new-found sources of supply have to travel to deliver grain, shipping availability, and, of course, the incremental costs incurred to move supplies. As of 2021, the EU – the Black Sea states’ principle competitor in the wheat-export market – and 48% of total wheat exports to Middle East and African countries (Chart 5). The EU's ability to increase exports for the remainder of the 2021/22 crop year will depend on its production, since demand for exports will be guaranteed given the crisis in the Black Sea. Chart 4Other Exporters Will Need To Ramp Up Chart 5MENA Is EU’s Primary Wheat Export Market The European Commission expects the EU to export a record 40mm tons of wheat for the 2022/23 market year, 6mm tons higher than its expected 2021/22 exports. Based on past trade patterns, these excesses will go to the Middle East, Northern and Sub-Saharan Africa. Strong USD Favors LatAm Exports US wheat exports will not be competitive this year or next, given the strong USD and relatively high prices (Chart 6). Additionally, this year’s winter-wheat crop will be affected by current drought conditions in the key Hard Red Winter wheat growing regions of Western Kansas, Colorado, Oklahoma and Texas. Canada faces a similar issue to its North American neighbor. Compared to other major wheat exporting states, it exports wheat at the second highest price, after the US. Furthermore, in 2021/22 Canadian wheat output is expected to be the lowest in 14 years following a warm and dry summer. The USDA expects strong Argentinian and Brazilian wheat exports in 2021/22. Compared to exports from the EU, US, Australia and Canada, wheat from these two sources is cheaper and hence will attract price sensitive bids from the Middle East and Africa. Chart 6US Wheat Remains Non-Competitive A strong USD will incentivize the LatAm giants’ wheat exports since their input costs are in local-currency terms and their revenues are in USD. While some countries have taken advantage of high wheat and food prices to increase exports, others have imposed restrictions or outright bans on exports, which will continue to drive prices higher. Kazakhstan, which constitutes nearly 5% of global wheat exports, now has a quota on such exports, which will affect Central Asian import markets. India was expected to constitute an uncharacteristically large share of wheat exports this year and next. However, the country is experiencing its hottest March in 122 years, which most likely will reduce its harvest this year and incentivize it to keep wheat stocks at home. The world’s second largest wheat producing and consuming nation expects a 6% drop in production this year.6 Fertilizer Costs Will Remain High … Countries’ abilities to increase production will depend on fertilizer availability and costs. The USDA cited high fertilizer prices as one of the causes for lower expected Australian wheat output in 2022/23. Prices of natural gas – the primary feedstock for fertilizers – took off like a rocket following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. High natgas prices feed directly into fertilizer costs (Chart 7). The EU's proposal to ban Russian oil imports could see Russia embargo natgas supply in retaliation, which would further spike natgas and fertilizer costs. This will have knock-on effects on all ags markets. Fertilizer export bans announced by Russia and China are another factor driving fertilizer prices higher (Chart 8). High fertilizer costs most likely will dissuade farmers from using fertilizers in volumes associated with more normal market conditions, and likely will cause them to wait on planting and treating acreage, which will lower crop quality or delay planting. Both scenarios will lead to higher crop prices (Chart 9). Chart 7High Natgas Prices Feeds Right Into Fertilizers Chart 8Russia, China Are Big Fertilizer Exporters Chart 9Nitrogen Fertilizer Prices Continue To Rise …As Do Shipping Costs Redrawing trade routes – i.e., finding new supplies and new shippers to compensate for the loss of Ukrainian wheat exports – will be expensive. For example, US grain shipping costs soared to an 8-year high after countries, led by China, dramatically increased soybean imports from the US due to a drought in Brazil.7 In 2021, high shipping costs led directly to higher food prices (Chart 10).8 Shipping, like any other commodity, is a function of supply and demand for different types of vessels capable of carrying grain from one part of the world to another. On the supply-side, port closures in China and the Black Sea are increasing port congestion, and making ships available for moving grains scarce. The Ukraine war has stranded ships in the Black Sea and forced merchants to re-route their shipments. This increases sailing times, which has the effect of contributing to supply scarcity in shipping markets. Fewer available ships, coupled with high fuel prices are keeping freight rates elevated. A low orderbook of expected new-vessel additions to the global shipping fleet in 2022 and 2023, along with guidance for ships to reduce speeds to increase fuel efficiency, will exacerbate current ship supply scarcity.9 On the demand side, the major international economic organizations have reduced 2022 GDP estimates due to lower economic activity. Lower economic activity will translate into lower ship demand and hence reduce prices (Chart 11). Chart 10Shipping Prices Remain Elevated Chart 11Shipping Demand Driven By Economic Activity   Shipping prices will drop meaningfully once port congestion clears. This will depend on the duration of COVID-19 in China and the evolution of the Russia-Ukraine war. A recession – the probability of which will increase if the EU bans Russian oil imports and Russia retaliates with its own natgas ban – acts as a downside risk to shipping costs. Investment Implications The gap in Black Sea wheat exports produced by the Russia-Ukraine war will require a ramp-up in other countries’ supply. Higher production is contingent on weather conditions and input costs. Changing weather patterns, due to climate change, will increase food insecurity, and make it more difficult to predict how ag markets – particularly grain trading – will handle this shock and other shocks down the road. We remain neutral agricultural commodities but will follow wheat and food market developments closely.   Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com   Commodity Round-Up Energy: Bullish Going into the Northern Hemisphere's summer driving season, US retail gasoline prices are trading at record levels -- $4.328/gal ($181.78/bbl) as of 9 May 2022, according to the US Energy Information Administration (Chart 12). Regular gasoline (RBOB specification traded on the NYMEX) for delivery in the NY Harbor settled at $144.27/bbl ($3.4349/gal) on Tuesday, giving refiners a rough wholesale margin (versus Brent crude oil) of $41.81/bbl. Retail diesel fuel prices also have been extremely well bid, posting record highs as well of $5.623/gal ($236.17/bbl) on 9 May 2022 (Chart 13). On the NYMEX, the ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel contract for July delivery settled at $3.6793/gal ($154.53/bbl). Jet fuel prices also are extremely well bid, as demand increases against a backdrop of lower refinery output pushed NY Harbor prices to $7.61/gal ($319.62/bbl) on 4 April 2022. NY Harbor jet-fuel prices have been much stronger than US Gulf prices and European prices seen in the Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp (ARA) markets, which were averaging ~ $3.60/gal, according to the EIA. This is accounted for by robust demand – evident since mid-2021, when it recovered pandemic-induced losses – and lower-than-normal output of jet by refiners. Assuming the US does not go into a profound recession, refined-product markets likely will remain tight during the summer-driving season and into the rest of this year, in our estimation. As is the case with the Exploration & Production companies, refiners also have been parsimonious with their capex, which translates into lower capacity to meet demand. Base Metals: Bullish Per the latest US CFTC data, we believe hedge funds and speculators investing in copper are dismissing bullish micro fundamentals and are focusing on bearish macroeconomic factors, such as the probability of an economic slow down increases. This would explain why funds’ short positions have exceeded long positions for the first time since end-May 2020. We have written about medium-to-long-term bullish micro fundamentals at length in previous reports.10 On micro fundamentals, the Chilean constitutional assembly passed articles expanding environmental protection from mining over the weekend. These will be added to the draft constitution to be voted on in September. The article expanding state control in Chilean mining activity did not pass and will be renegotiated before being sent back to the constitutional assembly for a second vote. Uncertain governance will affect mining investment in the state, as BHP recently highlighted. Chart 12 Chart 13           Footnotes 1     Please see Wheat Production by Country 2022, published by worldpopulationreview.com. 2     Awika (2011) notes, "… cereal grains are the single most important source of calories to a majority of the world population. Developing countries depend more on cereal grains for their nutritional needs than the developed world. Close to 60% of calories in developing countries are derived directly from cereals, with values exceeding 80% in the poorest countries." Please see Joseph M. Awika (2011), "Major Cereal Grains Production and Use around the World," published by the American Chemical Society. The three most important grains in this regard are rice, corn and wheat. 3    Please see Egypt's Arab Spring: The bleak reality 10 years after the uprising, published by dw.com on January 25, 2021. 4    Please see First Ukrainian corn cargo leaves Romanian Black Sea port, published by Reuters on April 29, 2022. 5    All USDA estimates mentioned in this report are taken from the USDA’s Grain and Feed Annual for each country. 6    Please refer to After five record crops, heat wave threatens India’s wheat output, export plans, published by Reuters on May 2, 2022. 7     Please refer to U.S. Grain Shipping Costs Soar With War and Drought Swinging Demand, published by Bloomberg on March 18, 2022. 8    For a more detailed discussion, please refer to Risk of Persistent Food-Price Inflation, which we published on November 11, 2021. 9    For estimates of orderbook vessels in 2022/23 please see Shipping market outlook 2022 Container vs Dry bulk, published by IHS Markit on November 30, 2021; slower speeds could reduce effective shipping capacity by 3-5%, according to S&P Global (see Shipping efficiency targets could prompt slower speeds and reduced capacity: market sources). 10   For the latest on this, please see Copper Demand Will Ignore Recession, which we published on April 14, 2022.   Investment Views and Themes Recommendations   Recommendations: We are re-establishing our positions in XME, PICK and XOP, which were stopped out APRIL 22, 2022 with gains of 42.42%, 9.77% and 20.91%, respectively, at tonight's close. We also will be adding the VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK) to our recommendations, given our bullish view of the global refining sector. Strategic Recommendations   Trades Closed in 2022  

Special Report

Executive Summary The US Still Dominates Economic Output While the Ukraine war has been positive for the greenback, there is a slow tectonic shift away from the dollar as China rethinks holding concentrated foreign currency reserves. In the near term, the dollar faces positive macro variables and still-rising geopolitical tensions. Longer term, as global trade slows and countries gravitate into regional trading blocs, the dollar will need to fall to narrow the US trade deficit. By the same token, the Chinese RMB could weaken in the near term but will stabilize longer term. China will promote its currency across Asia. Currency volatility will take a step-function higher in this new paradigm. Winners will be the currencies of small open economies, especially in resource-rich nations. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GOLD 2019-12-06 27.7% Bottom Line: Cyclical forces continue to underpin the dollar, such as rising US interest rates, a slowdown in global growth, and a safe haven premium from still-high geopolitical tensions. That said, the dollar is overbought, expensive, and vulnerable to reserve diversification over the longer term. While tactical long positions make sense, strategic investors should not chase the dollar higher. Feature Currency market action this week focused on two key central bank meetings: the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. The Fed raised rates by 50 basis points while the BoE raised by 25 points, yet the market expectation differs. In the US, markets imply that the Fed can keep real interest positive while engineering a soft landing in the economy. In the UK (and Euro Area), markets see more acute stagflationary risks and assign a higher probability to a policy error. This situation, together with rising geopolitical risk, has put a bid under the dollar. Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyDie Cast By EU: Inflation, Recession Risks Rise Brewing in the background is the prospect that the Ukraine war and US sanctions on Russia could have longer-term consequences on the dollar. Specifically, Russia and China are now locked into a geopolitical partnership to undermine US geopolitical dominance, including the dollar’s supremacy. While this discussion will inevitably come with some speculation about what will happen in the future, what does the evidence say so far? More importantly, what are some profitable investment opportunities that could arise from any shift? The Russo-Chinese Rebellion Chart 1The US Needs To Externally Finance Defense Spending From Russia’s and China’s point of view, the United States threatens to establish global hegemony. The US possesses the world’s largest economy and most sophisticated military. It has largely maintained its preponderance in these spheres despite the rise of China, the resurgence of Russia, and the formation of the European Union as a geopolitical entity (Chart 1). If the US succeeds in its current endeavor of crippling Russia’s economy and surrounding it with NATO military allies, the world will be even more imbalanced in terms of power, while China will be isolated and insecure. To illustrate this point, NATO’s military spending is much higher than that of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is not nearly as developed a military alliance (Chart 2). Hence Russia and China believe they must take action to counter the US and establish a global balance of power. When Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping met on February 4 to declare that their strategic partnership will suffer “no limits,” which means no military limits, they declared a new multipolar era and warned against US domination under the guise of liberalism. If China allows Putin to fail in his conflict with the West, the Russian regime will eventually undergo a major leadership and policy change and China will become isolated. Whereas if China accepts Russia’s current strategic overture, China will be fortified. Russia can be immensely supportive of China’s Eurasian strategy to bypass US maritime dominance and improve supply security (Chart 3). Chart 2NATO Vs SCO: US Threat Of Dominance The consequence of this Russo-Chinese alliance will be to transact in a currency that falls outside sanctions by the US. This will be no easy feat. The US dollar still monopolizes the world’s monetary system, even though the US is likely to lose economic clout over time.  Chart 3China Cannot Reject Russia​​​​​ De-Dollarization And A Brewing USD Crisis? Fact Versus Fiction A reserve currency must serve the three basic functions of money on a global scale – providing a store of value, unit of account, and accepted medium of exchange. This status gives the dominant reserve currency an “exorbitant privilege,” a range of advantages including the ability to run persistent current account deficits and impose devastating sanctions on geopolitical rivals. Since the turn of the century, the US has struggled to maintain domestic political stability and has failed to deter challenges to its global leadership posed by Russia, China, and lesser powers. Lacking public support for foreign military adventures after Iraq and Afghanistan, Washington turned to economic sanctions to try to influence the behavior of other states. The results have been mixed in terms of geopolitics but cumulatively they have been neutral or positive for the trade-weighted dollar. The US adopted harsh sanctions against North Korea in 2005, Iran in 2010, Russia in 2012, Venezuela in 2015, and China in 2018. The primary trend in the dollar was never altered (Chart 4). Chart 4A Chronicle Of Sanctions And The Dollar Yet sweeping sanctions against Russia and China are qualitatively different from other sanctions– as they are among the world’s great powers. The extraordinary sanctions on Russia in 2022 – including cutting off its access to US dollar reserves – have proven deeply unsettling for China and other nations that fear they might someday end up on the wrong side of the US’s foreign policy. Russia’s own experience proves that diversification away from the dollar is likely to occur. From a peak of 47% in 2007, Russia reduced its dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves to 16%. It cut its Treasury holdings from a peak of over 35% of international reserves to less than 1% today. Meanwhile Russia increased its gold holdings from 2% in 2008 to 20% (Chart 5). The Russians accelerated their diversification away from the dollar after invading Ukraine in 2014 to reduce the impact of sanctions. However, the world is familiar with Russian economic isolation. The West embargoed the USSR throughout the Cold War from 1949-1991. The dollar rose to prominence during this period, so it is not intuitive that Russia’s latest withdrawal from the global economy will enable other countries to abandon the dollar when they have failed in the past due to lack of alternatives. What is clear is that there is no clean or easy exit today from a dollar-denominated financial system. But there are a few lessons from Russia: The ruble has recouped all the losses since the implementation of sanctions. It runs a large current account surplus and has stemmed capital outflows. Another factor has been a sharp reduction in its dependence on the dollar. This will cushion the inflationary impact of US sanctions. Going forward, Russia will be much more insulated from the US dollar but at a terrible cost to potential economic growth (Chart 6). A dearth of US dollar capex into Russia will cripple productivity growth. The lesson for other US rivals will be to take economic stability into account when engaging in geopolitical rivalry.  Chart 5Russia Was Able To Dump Treasurys... The dollar has been unfazed by the Russian debacle. The victims have been other reserve currencies such as the euro, British pound, and Japanese yen, which are engulfed in an energy crisis from Russia’s actions.  Chart 6...But The Economic Impact Will Remain Severe​​​​​​ The key question that matters for investors will be what China will do. As one of the largest holders of US Treasurys, a destabilizing exit would have dramatic currency market impacts and could backfire on China. The trick will be to continue exiting this system without precipitating domestic instability. What Will China Do? China has learned two critical lessons from the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, with regard to raising the appeal of the RMB. First, the economic impact of US sanctions can still be devastating even when you have diversified out of dollars. Second, access to commodities is ever more important. As such, any strategy China chooses will need to mitigate these risks. China started diversifying away from the dollar in 2011 and today holds $1.05 trillion in US Treasurys. A little less than half of its foreign exchange reserves are denominated in dollars (Chart 7). This has been a gradual diversification that has not upended the current monetary regime. More importantly, China’s diversification accounts for the bulk of the shift by non-allies away from treasuries. Their share of foreign-held treasuries has fallen from 41% in 2009 to 23% today (Chart 8). Chart 7China Has Lowered USD Reserve Holdings​​​​​​ Chart 8US Allies Still Willing To Hold USDs...​​​​​​ China’s diversification has helped drive down the overall foreign share of US government debt holdings (excluding domestic central banks) from close to 50% in the middle of the last decade to 36% today (Chart 9). It has also weighed on the dollar. China can and will speed up its diversification from the dollar in the wake of the Ukraine war. While Americans will say that China only need fear such sanctions if it attacks Taiwan or other countries, China will not rest assured. Beijing must respond to US capability, not the Biden Administration’s stated intentions. A new Republican administration could arise as soon as January 2025 and take the offensive against China. The US and China are already engaged in great power rivalry and Beijing cannot afford to substitute hope for strategy. China ran a $224 billion current account surplus in 2021, so part of its strategy could be to reduce the pool of savings that need to be recycled every year into global assets. Since 2007 China has sent large amounts of outward direct investment into the world to acquire real assets and natural resources. The Xi administration tried to bring coherence to this outward investment by prioritizing different countries and investments adhere to China’s economic and strategic aims. The Belt and Road Initiative is the symbol of this process (Chart 10). Going forward, China will continue this process. It will also recycle more of its savings at home by increasing investment in critical industries such as energy security, semiconductors, and defense. Chart 9...But A Slow Diversification From US Debt Persists The key priorities will remain a Eurasian strategy of circumventing the US navy. Building natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure to link up with Russia is an obvious area of emphasis, although it will involve tough negotiations with Moscow. China will also prioritize Central Asia, the Middle East, South Asia, and mainland Southeast Asia as areas where its influence can grow with limited intervention by the US and its allies (Chart 11). Chart 10The Belt And Road Initiative In Progress​​​​​​   Chart 11China Outward Investment Will Need To Be Strategic Chart 12The RMB Could Dominate Intra-Regional Asean Trade As China invests more at home and in other countries, financing and invoicing deals in the renminbi will grow. While the dollar is the transactional currency globally, it is far less relevant when considering local trading blocs. The euro dominates intra-European trade, suggesting China can try to expand RMB invoicing for intra-Asian trade (Chart 12). Even then, however, the yuan faces serious obstacles from China’s inability or unwillingness to extend security guarantees to its partners, failure shift the economic model to consumerism, persistent currency controls, closed capital account, and geopolitical competition with the United States. Investors should pay close attention to shifts occurring at the margin. The number of bilateral swap lines offered to foreign central banks by the People’s Bank of China has grown (Chart 13), with a total amount of around 4 trillion yuan. This allows the PBoC to use its massive foreign exchange reserves, worth about US$3.2 trillion, to back yuan liabilities. As China continues to grow and increases the share of RMB trade within its sphere of influence, the yuan will rise as an invoicing currency (Chart 14). This could take years, even decades, but a shift is already underway. Chart 13The People's Bank Of Asia?​​​​​​ Chart 14China Is Growing In Economic Importance​​​​​​ In the near term, any US sanctions on China will hurt the RMB. Combined with hypo-globalization, China’s zero-Covid policy, narrowing interest rate differentials, and flight from Chinese assets, it is too soon to be positive on the RMB in the context of US-China confrontation (Chart 15). Longer term, China’s ability to ascend the reserve currency ladder will require a more radical change in Chinese policy to move the dollar. Chart 15CNY And US Sanctions Where Does The Euro Fit In? The biggest competitor to the US dollar is the euro, which took the largest chunk out of the US’s share of the global currency reserve basket in recent decades (Chart 16). Yet the EU could suffer a long-term loss of security, productivity, and stability from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing energy cutoff with Russia. Chart 16The Dollar Remains A Reserve Currency The EU will have to spend more on energy security and national defense. This will lead to an increase in debt securities that other countries could buy, which offers a way for countries to diversify from the dollar. However, Europe does not provide China or Russia with protection from US sanctions. The EU is allied with the US, it imposed sanctions on Russia along with the US, and like the US is pursuing extra-territorial law enforcement with its sanctions. When the US withdrew from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the EU disagreed technically, but in practice it enforced the sanctions anyway. The euro is hardly a safer reserve currency than sterling or the yen for countries looking to quarrel with the United States. The fact is that all of these allied states are likely to cooperate together in the event that any other state attempts to revise the global order as Russia has done. Not necessarily because they are democracies and share similar values but because they derive their national security from the US and its alliance system. The takeaway is that the euro will become a buying opportunity if and when the security environment stabilizes. Then diversification into the euro will occur. But it will not become a landslide that unseats the dollar, since the euro will still have a higher geopolitical risk premium. Investment Takeaways The historical evidence suggests that US sanctions have not weighed on the dollar. In the case of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, it has been positive for the greenback. That said, there is a slow tectonic shift from the dollar, as each economic powerhouse evaluates the merits of holding concentrated foreign currency reserves. In the near term, the dollar will continue to be driven by traditional economic variables – global growth, real interest rate differentials, and the resilience of the US economy. That remains a positive. Geopolitical tensions reinforce the dollar’s current rally. Longer term, as globalization deteriorates and countries gravitate into regional trading blocs, the dollar will need to adjust lower to narrow the US trade deficit. By the same token, the RMB could weaken in the near term but will need to stabilize longer term, if Beijing wants it to be considered an anchor and store of value for other Asian currencies. Chart 17Silver Demand Could Explode Higher As Currency Volatility Rises The key takeaway is that currency volatility will take a step-function higher in this new paradigm. The winners could be the currencies of small open economies, especially in resource-rich nations. A world in which economic powers increasingly pursue national interests is likely to be inflationary. These powers will deplete the external pool of global savings, as current account balances wind down in favor of national and strategic interests. They will also likely encourage the demand for anti-fiat assets as currency volatility takes a step-function higher. Gold is likely to do well is this environment, but silver could be on the cusp of an explosion higher. The metal has found some measure of support around $22-23 per ounce even as manufacturing bottlenecks have hammered industrial demand. Long-only investors should hold both gold and silver, but a short gold/silver position makes sense both economically and from a valuation standpoint (Chart 17). Geopolitical Housekeeping: We are closing our Long FTSE 100 / Short DM-ex-US Equities trade for a gain of 19.5%. We still favor this trade cyclically and will look to reinstate it at a future date. We are also booking gains on our short TWD-USD trade for a return of 5.8% — though we remain short Taiwanese equities and continue to expect a fourth Taiwan Strait geopolitical crisis.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix

Special Report

Executive Summary Europe's Largest Import Bill: Oil The EU crossed the Rubicon this week, proposing to eliminate Russian oil imports within six months. The speed of putting the sanctions into effect, and Russia’s retaliation, will be critical to whether the world endures continued inflationary pressures or whether a global recession ensues. Russia indicated it will launch its own round of sanctions in the near future, which could profoundly affect not only global oil and gas markets, but once again induce input price shocks to electricity markets – which will hit firms and households again with higher prices – and agricultural markets. Turmoil in commodity markets has opened a policy debate over whether the world will be forced to migrate to a new monetary order based on access to commodities and control of commodity flows, which would replace the fiat-money architecture that succeeded the post-WWII Bretton Woods system. This debate draws together numerous trends – the centrality of commodities to price levels and inflation; central-bank policy; failed regulation at commodity exchanges; and commodity scarcity due to weak capex. Bottom Line: Commodity markets are changing rapidly as fundamentals adapt to supply tightness and an extremely erratic demand recovery.  However, this does not mark the beginning of a new Bretton Woods era.  Markets adapt quickly to changing fundamentals and that will continue. Feature With its proposal this week to ban the import of Russian oil, the EU crossed the Rubicon and now will prepare for an escalation of its economic war with Russia. Oil imports are, by far, the EU's largest energy import expense, and Russia is its largest supplier (Chart 1). Russian natural gas exports to Europe account for 74% of its total natgas exports, although natgas comprises a much smaller share of Russia’s revenue than oil (Chart 2). In a pecuniary sense, oil is far more important, but in an economic sense gas is more meaningful for Europe. Chart 1Europe's Largest Import Bill: Oil Chart 2Russia's Largest Market: Europe Russia produced 10.1mm b/d of crude and condensates in 2021. Of the 4.7mm b/d of this that Russia exported, OECD Europe was its largest customer, at 50% of total, according to the US EIA. If Russia's production is curtailed by roughly 1mm b/d this year and next year due to sanctions, we estimate Brent prices could reach $120/bbl. Losing 1.8mm this year and another 700k b/d next year could push Brent prices above $140/bbl (Chart 3). On the natgas side, one-third of the ~ 25 Tcf of Russian production last year was exported via pipeline or as LNG, based on 2021 data from the EIA. This amounted to almost 9 Tcf. Most of this – 74% – was exported via pipeline to the OECD Europe. These are dedicated volumes flowing through Russia's network into Europe. Until the Power of Siberia pipeline is expanded – likely over the next 2-3 years — this gas will not be available for export. Chart 3Losing Russian Oil Exports Will Push Prices Sharply Higher Oil and gas exports last year accounted for close to 40% of the Russian government's budget. Crude and product revenue last year came in at just under $180 billion, while pipeline and LNG shipments of natgas accounted for close to $62 billion of the Russian government's revenues. Clearly, the stakes are extremely high for Russia if Europe embargoes oil imports. Escalation Of Economic War Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak last month threatened to shut off Russian exports of natural gas if the EU cut off oil imports. Whether – or how quickly – that threat is acted upon will be critical for Europe. Speculation around the EU's proposal to embargo oil imports of all kinds from Russia centers on the ban becoming effective by the end of this week, with a six-month phase-down of imports.1 It is still possible that the sanctions will be vetoed and revised. But with Germany changing its position and now willing to embargo oil, it is only a matter of time before the majority of the EU cuts off Russian oil imports. In response, Russia will launch its own round of embargoes, which could profoundly affect not only global oil and gas markets, but once again induce input-price shocks to electricity markets – which will hit household budgets and base-metals smelters and refiners – and agricultural markets, given the large share of natgas in fertilizers (Chart 4). It is not difficult to imagine base-metals refining operations closing again in Europe, along with crop-planting delays rising.2 On the back of this collateral damage from the cut-off of Russian oil and gas exports, we would expect inflation and inflation expectations to take another leg up. This comes against a backdrop in which central banks led by the US Fed already have initiated a rate-hiking program to address inflation that is running far hotter than previously forecast. Chart 4Tight Natgas Markets Drive Fertilizer/Grain Prices Higher Power, Fertilizer, Base Metals Could Be Shocked By Russian Cut-Offs Policymakers Reassess Commodities This turmoil in commodity markets has ignited a policy debate over whether the world will be forced to migrate to a new monetary order. The new order, so the argument goes, would be based on access to commodities and control of commodity flows and would replace the fiat-money architecture that succeeded the post-WWII Bretton Woods system. This debate draws together numerous trends – the centrality of commodities to price levels and inflation; central-bank policy; failed regulation at commodity exchanges; non-USD invoicing and funding; and commodity scarcity – particularly in industrial commodities like oil, natgas and metals due to weak capex over almost a decade. The debates around these different crises are being framed around the heightened geopolitical awareness of the critical role of commodities in the language of financial markets. This is a novel innovation; however, it essentially is an argument by analogy and can obfuscate underlying causes and effects. Bretton Woods III In The Offing? Following WW II, the US and other advanced economies launched the Bretton Woods system, under which the US would operate and maintain a commodity-money regime – i.e., the gold standard – that maintained convertability of USD to gold upon demand. This post-World War II Bretton Woods (BW) system – call it BWI – remained in place until the early 1970s and made the USD the preeminent currency in the world during that period. Literally, the system, operated by the Fed, made the USD "as good as gold." That didn't last, as US domestic exigencies – the Vietnam War and the War on Poverty – forced the US to abandon gold-convertibility and adopt a fiat-money system to finance these multiple wars. Nevertheless the dollar retained its centrality to global markets. Call this fiat system BWII. As of 2022, the dollar remains the world’s dominant reserve currency, accounting for ~ 60% of the $12.25 trillion of foreign exchange reserves, according to IMF data (Chart 5).3 As a vehicle currency, it accounts for close to 90% of daily FX trading – amounting to ~ $6 trillion/day of turnover. The dollar also is the preeminent funding and invoice currency. Trade invoicing denominated in USD accounts for 93% of imports and 97% of exports worldwide. Chart 5USD Remains Dominant Reserve Currency According to the WTO, global trade in 2019 (just before the COVID-19 pandemic) was just shy of $19 trillion (Chart 6). This global dominance of the USD means the dollar’s funding-currency role “mediates the transmission of U.S. monetary policy to global financing conditions.”4 This has been the case for the 23 years since the creation of the euro, including the periods before and after the 2008 global financial crisis. Chart 6USD Dominates World Trade The dollar’s importance to the global economy has only grown since the BWI era.5 Obstfeld notes US gross external assets and liabilities relative to GDP “grow sharply (but roughly commensurately) up until the global financial crisis, reaching ratios to GDP in the neighborhood of 150 percent. Since then, assets have levelled off but liabilities have continued to grow.” The dollar faces a range of challenges, as we discuss below, but any discussion must begin with its resilience as the top currency – a resilience that spans the creation of the euro, the rise of China, vast US budget and trade deficits, multiple rounds of quantitative easing, and political instability in Washington. A Return To Commodity-Based Money? The full power of the Fed's role at the center of the global monetary system – as a reserve currency and as the preeminent medium for funding and invoicing trade – was revealed following the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. The US froze Russian foreign reserves, denied it access to the international SWIFT payments system, and imposed sanctions on Russian firms and individuals, and anyone trading with them. Following the US actions, Russia's economy was partially frozen out of global trade, banking and finance. Western partners abandoned their Russian investments, taking their capital and technology out of the country. Outside of the sanctions, individual firms such as refiners, shippers and trading companies “self-sanctioned” their dealings with Russia, and refused to handle inbound or outbound Russian commodities. Given the US capability revealed, and the threat posed to other countries should the US sanction them in a likely manner, new risks to the dollar system will emerge. The primacy of the USD, and the Fed's role in maintaining its central banking position to the world, are by no means assured. Indeed, other states – namely China – will try to insulate themselves from similar sanctions. India is apparently willing to trade with Russia in rubles. Saudi Arabia is exploring being paid in RMB for oil exports to China and a wide range of states could increase their acceptance of RMB at least to cover their growing trade with China. China has been pushing hard to have its RMB recognized and used as a global reserve currency, and a trade-invoicing and trade-funding currency. For this to happen, China also would have to allow its currency to become a vehicle currency – i.e., the anchor leg in FX trading. Zoltan Pozsar, a Credit Suisse analyst, recently penned an article exploring the new terrain exposed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the US and EU responses.6 For Pozsar, "Commodity reserves will be an essential part of Bretton Woods III, and historically wars are won by those who have more food and energy supplies – food to fuel horses and soldiers back in the day, and food to fuel soldiers and fuel to fuel tanks and planes today." Pozsar avers that his formulation of Bretton Woods III will reverse the disinflation created by globalization, and "serve up an inflationary impulse (de-globalization, autarky, just-in-case hoarding of commodities and duplication of supply chains, and more military spending to be able to protect whatever seaborne trade is left)." These conclusions are similar to conclusions we have reached over the course of the past few years, as it became increasingly apparent that the US was losing geopolitical clout relative to rising powers, mainly China, and that the international system was becoming multipolar and unstable. The Ukraine war confirmed the new environment of Great Power Rivalry. Nation-states will indeed amass and hoard commodities as they will need to gird for battle as this rivalry heats up. Preparation for war and war itself are historically inflationary (Chart 7). Chart 7War And Preparation For War Are Inflationary However, countries still have to pay for commodities in a currency that exporters are willing to receive. Yet the biggest global oil and food exporters depend on the US for their security, except Russia. Even in base metals the US wields extraordinary influence over the non-aligned exporters. These states could reduce their dollar invoicing to cover their share of trade with countries outside the West, but their national security alliances and partnerships imply a hard-to-change view on which economies and currencies will be most stable over the long run. The dollar is again preeminent. China unquestionably wants to diversify away from the dollar. But China’s trade partners will have a limit on how much yuan cash they are willing to hold. If they want to recycle this cash into China’s economy, China must open its capital account. But this would reduce the Communist Party’s control of the domestic economy due to the Impossible Trinity (the yuan would have to float freely). So until China makes this change, the world is stuck in today’s monetary system. By contrast, if China totally closes its system due to domestic or foreign political threats, then the world faces a recession and investors will not be rushing to sell the dollar. For now China is trying to have it both ways: maintaining large foreign exchange reserves while gradually diversifying away from the dollar (Chart 8). China selling off its Treasury holdings and dollar reserves, which began in the aftermath of the Great Recession, is the biggest monetary shift since 1999, when the euro emerged and China’s purchases of Treasuries began to surge due to trade surpluses on the back of its joining the WTO. But there is little basis for China or anyone else to abandon fiat currencies and return to the gold standard. Fiat currencies enable states to control the money supply and hence to try to control their economies and societies. The Chinese are the least likely to abandon fiat currency given their laser focus on employment, manufacturing, and social stability. China is a commodity importer, so that if it seeks to amass commodities as strategic reserves in the midst of a commodity boom, it will pay top price. This means the yuan would need to be kept strong. But in fact China is allowing the yuan to depreciate, as it would face higher unemployment and instability if domestic demand were further suppressed by a rising yuan. China is already undergoing a painful transition away from export orientation – and Beijing has already acknowledged that de-industrialization should slow down because it poses a sociopolitical threat (Chart 9). A monetary revolution that strengthens the yuan at the expense of the dollar would force an immediate conclusion to China’s transition away from export-manufacturing. That would be politically destabilizing. Chart 8China Diversifies from USD - But Closed Capital Account Prevents Global RMB Chart 9Stronger RMB Would De-Industrialize China At Great Political Risk If China or other countries attempt to create a commodity base for their currencies, but simultaneously try to prevent a fixed exchange rate that constrains their money supply, then there will be little difference from a fiat currency regime. Today’s major reserve currency issuers already possess reserves of physical wealth (e.g. commodities) beneath their flexible monetary policy regimes – this dynamic would not inherently change. Of course, Europe, Japan, and the United Kingdom are the leading providers of reserve currencies outside the US and yet they are relatively lacking in commodity reserves. If global investors begin chasing currencies primarily on the basis of commodity reserves, the USD will not suffer the most, as the United States is a resource-rich country. China’s policy and strategy may become clearer after the twentieth party congress this fall, but most likely the current contradictions will persist. China will want to prolong the period of economic engagmeent with the West for as long as possible even as it prepares for a time when engagement is utterly broken. While China knows that the US will pursue strategic containment, and US-China engagement is over, it also knows that European leaders have a different set of interests. They have enough difficulty dealing with Russia and are not eager to expand their sanctions to China. Yet switching from dollar to euro reserves offers China little protection against sanctions in any major confrontation in the coming years. A radical decision by China to buy high and sell low (realize big losses on Treasuries and buy high-priced commodities) would show that Beijing is expecting Russian-style confrontation with the West immediately, which would scare foreign investors away from China. Net foreign direct investment in China has surged since the downfall of the Trump presidency (Chart 10). But that process would reverse as companies saw China going down Russia’s path and disengaging from the global monetary system. In that context, western governments would also penalize their own companies for investing in a geopolitical rival that was apparently preparing for conflict (while buttressing Russia). In short, private capital will flee countries that abandon the global financial system because that would be an economically inefficient decision taken for reasons of state security, and hence it would imply higher odds of conflict. Wealthy nations see China’s and other emerging markets’ foreign exchange reserves as “collateral” against asset seizures and geopolitical risks: if China reduces the collateral, private capital will feel less secure flowing into China.7 Chart 10If China Abandonds USD To Prepare For Sanctions, FDI Will Reverse Ultimately China will try to wean itself off the dollar – but it will keep doing so gradually to avoid a catastrophic social and economic change at home and abroad. This is continuation of post-2008 status quo. An accelerated shift away from USD will be interpreted by global actors as preparation for war (just like Russia’s shift). This will drive investors to swap Chinese assets for American or other assets. History suggests that USD devaluations followed US wars and budget expansions. Investors should wait until the next US military adventure, in Iran or elsewhere, before expecting massive dollar depreciation. If the US pursues an offshore balancing strategy, as it appears to be doing today, then other countries will become less stable and the dollar will remain appealing as a safe haven. Bottom Line: Russia’s and China’s diversification away from the dollar over the past decade has not caused global flight from the dollar. International trust in the economy and government of Russia and China is not very high. The euro, the viable alternative to the dollar, is less attractive in the face of the Ukraine war and broader geopolitical instability. The path toward monetary revolution is for China to open up its capital account, make its currency convertible, and sell USD assets while appreciating the yuan. Yet China’s leaders have not embarked on this course for fear of domestic instability. In lieu of that, the current monetary regime continues.     Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     Please see Brussels proposes EU import ban on all Russian oil published by ft.com on May 4, 2022 for summary of the EU's export-ban proposals. 2     Please see our report from March 31, 2022 entitled Germany Closer To Rationing Natgas for further discussion. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 3    See Obstfeld, Maurice (2020), Global Dimensions of U.S. Monetary Policy, International Journal of Central Banking, 16:1, pp. 73-132. 4    Obstfeld (2020, p. 113). 5    Obstfeld (2020, p. 77-78). 6    Please see Pozsar, Zoltan (2022), "Money, Commodities, and Bretton Woods III," published by Credit Suisse Economics. 7     For the “collateral” interpretation of US dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves, see Michael P. Dooley, David Folkerts-Landau, and Peter M. Garber, “US Sanctions Reinforce The Dollar’s Dominance,” NBER Working Paper Series 29943, April 2022, nber.org.  

Executive Summary German GeoRisk Indicator Russia and Germany have begun cutting off each other’s energy in a major escalation of strategic tensions. The odds of Finland and Sweden joining NATO have shot up. A halt to NATO enlargement, particularly on Russia’s borders, is Russia’s chief demand. Tensions will skyrocket. China’s reversion to autocracy and de facto alliance with Russia are reinforcing the historic confluence of internal and external risk, weighing on Chinese assets. Geopolitical risk is rising in South Korea and Hong Kong, rising in Spain and Italy, and flat in South Africa. France’s election will lower domestic political risk but the EU as a whole faces a higher risk premium. The Biden administration is doubling down on its defense of Ukraine, calling for $33 billion in additional aid and telling Russia that it will not dominate its neighbor. However, the Putin regime cannot afford to lose in Ukraine and will threaten to widen the conflict to intimidate and divide the West. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GLOBAL DEFENSIVES / CYCLICALS EQUITIES 2022-01-20 14.2% Bottom Line: Stay long global defensives over cyclicals. Feature Chart 1Geopolitical Risk And Policy Uncertainty Drive Up Dollar The dollar (DXY) is breaking above the psychological threshold of 100 on the back of monetary tightening and safe-haven demand. Geopolitical risk does not always drive up the dollar – other macroeconomic factors may prevail. But in today’s situation macro and geopolitics are converging to boost the greenback (Chart 1). Global economic policy uncertainty is also rising sharply. It is highly correlated with the broader trade-weighted dollar. The latter is nowhere near 2020 peaks but could rise to that level if current trends hold. A strong dollar reflects slowing global growth and also tightens global financial conditions, with negative implications for cyclical and emerging market equities. Bottom Line: Tactically favor US equities and the US dollar to guard against greater energy shock, policy uncertainty, and risk-aversion. Energy Cutoff Points To European Recession Chart 2Escalation With Russia Weighs Further On EU Assets Russia is reducing natural gas flows to Poland and Bulgaria and threatening other countries, Germany is now embracing an oil embargo against Russia, while Finland and Sweden are considering joining NATO. These three factors are leading to a major escalation of strategic tensions on the continent that will get worse before they get better, driving up our European GeoRisk indicators and weighing on European assets (Chart 2). Russia’s ultimatum in December 2021 stressed that NATO enlargement should cease and that NATO forces and weapons should not be positioned east of the May 1997 status quo. Russia invaded Ukraine to ensure its military neutrality over the long run.1 Finland and Sweden, seeing Ukraine’s isolation amid Russian invasion, are now reviewing whether to change their historic neutrality and join NATO. Public opinion polls now show Finnish support for joining at 61% and Swedish support at 57%. The scheduling of a joint conference between the country’s leaders on May 13 looks like it could be a joint declaration of their intention to join. The US and other NATO members will have to provide mutual defense guarantees for the interim period if that is the case, lest Russia attack. The odds that Finland and Sweden remain neutral are higher than the consensus holds (given the 97% odds that they join NATO on Predictit.org). But the latest developments suggest they are moving toward applying for membership. They fear being left in the cold like Ukraine in the event of an attack. Russia’s response will be critical. If Russia deploys nuclear weapons to Kaliningrad, as former President Dmitri Medvedev warned, then Moscow will be making a menacing show but not necessarily changing the reality of Russia’s nuclear strike capabilities. That is equivalent to a pass and could mark the peak of the entire crisis. The geopolitical risk premium would begin to subside after that. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyLe Pen And Other Hurdles (GeoRisk Update) However, Russia has also threatened “military-political repercussions” if the Nordics join NATO. Russia’s capabilities are manifestly limited, judging by Ukraine today and the Winter War of 1939, but a broader war cannot entirely be ruled out. Global financial markets will still need to adjust for a larger tail risk of a war in Finland/Sweden in the very near term. Most likely Russia will retaliate by cutting off Europe’s natural gas. Clearly this is the threat on the table, after the cutoff to Poland and Bulgaria and the warnings to other countries. In the near term, several companies are gratifying Russia and paying for gas in rubles. But these payments violate EU sanctions against Russia and the intention is to wean off Russian imports as soon as possible. Germany says it can reduce gas imports starting next year after inking a deal with Qatar. Hence Russia might take the initiative and start reducing the flow earlier. Bottom Line: If Europe plunges into recession as a result of an immediate natural gas cutoff, then strategic stability between Russia and the West will become less certain. The tail risk of a broader war goes up. Stay cyclically long US equities over global equities and tactically long US treasuries. Stay long defense stocks and gold. Stay Short CNY At the end of last year we argued that Beijing would double down on “Zero Covid” policy in 2022, at least until the twentieth national party congress this fall. Social restrictions serve a dual purpose of disease suppression and dissent repression. Now that the state is doubling down, what will happen next? The economy will deteriorate: imports are already contracting at a rate of 0.1% YoY. The manufacturing PMI has fallen to 48.1  and the service sector PMI to 42.0, indicating contraction. Furthermore, social unrest could emerge, as lockdowns serve as a catalyst to ignite underlying socioeconomic disparities. Hence the national party congress is less likely to go smoothly, implying that investors will catch a glimpse of political instability under the surface in China as the year progresses. The political risk premium will remain high (Chart 3). Chart 3China's Confluence Of Domestic And Foreign Risk Weighs On Stocks And Currency While Chairman Xi Jinping is still likely to clinch another ten years in power, it will not be auspicious amid an economic crash and any social unrest. Xi could be forced into some compromises on either Politburo personnel or policy adjustments. A notable indicator of compromise would be if he nominated a successor, though this would not provide any real long-term assurance to investors given the lack of formal mechanisms for power transfer. After the party congress we expect Xi to “let 100 flowers bloom,” meaning that he will ease fiscal, regulatory, and social policy so that today’s monetary and fiscal stimulus can work effectively. Right now monetary and fiscal easing has limited impact because private sector actors are averse to taking risk. Easing policy to boost the economy could also entail a diplomatic charm offensive to try to convince the US and EU to avoid imposing any significant sanctions on trade and investment flows, whether due to Russia or human rights violations. Such a diplomatic initiative would only succeed, if at all, in the short run. The US cannot allow a deep re-engagement with China since that would serve to strengthen the de facto Russo-Chinese strategic alliance. In other words, an eruption of instability threatens to weaken Xi’s hand and jeopardize his power retention. While it is extremely unlikely that Xi will fall from power, he could have his image of supremacy besmirched. It is likely that China will be forced to ease a range of policies, including lockdowns and regulations of key sectors, that will be marginally positive for economic growth. There may also be schemes to attract foreign investment. Bottom Line: If China expands the range of its policy easing the result could be received positively by global investors in 2023. But the short-term outlook is still negative and deteriorating due to China’s reversion to autocracy and confluence of political and geopolitical risk. Stay short CNY and neutral Chinese stocks. Stay Short KRW South Koreans went to the polls on March 9 to elect their new president for a five-year term. The two top candidates for the job were Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung. Yoon, a former public prosecutor, was the candidate for the People Power Party, a conservative party that can be traced back to the Saenuri and the Grand National Party, which was in power from 2007 to 2017 under President Lee Myung-bak and President Park Geun-hye. Lee, the governor of the largest province in Korea, was the candidate for the Democratic Party, the party of the incumbent President Moon Jae-in. Yoon won by a whisker, garnering 48.6% of the votes versus 47.8% for Lee. The margin of victory for Yoon is the lowest since Korea started directly electing its presidents. President-elect Yoon will be inaugurated in May. He will not have control of the National Assembly, as his party only holds 34% of the seats. The Democratic Party holds the majority, with 172 out of 300 seats. The next legislative election will be in 2024, which means that President Yoon will have to work with the opposition for a good two years before his party has a chance to pass laws on its own. President-elect Yoon was the more pro-business and fiscally restrained candidate. His nomination of Han Duck-soo as his prime minister suggests that, insofar as any domestic policy change is possible, he will be pragmatic, as Han served under two liberal administrations. Yoon’s lack of a majority and nomination of a left-leaning prime minister suggest that domestic policy will not be a source of uncertainty for investors through 2024. Foreign policy, by contrast, will be the biggest source of risk for investors. Yoon rejects the dovish “Moonshine” policy of his predecessor and favors a strong hand in dealing with North Korea. “War can be avoided only when we acquire an ability to launch pre-emptive strikes and show our willingness to use them,” he has argued. North Korea responded by expanding its nuclear doctrine and resuming tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles with the launch of the Hwasong-17 on March 24 – the first ICBM launch since 2017. In a significant upgrade of North Korea’s deterrence strategy, Kim Yo Jong, the sister of Kim Jong Un, warned on April 4 that North Korea would use nuclear weapons to “eliminate” South Korea if attacked (implying an overwhelming nuclear retaliation to any attack whatsoever). Kim Jong Un himself claimed on April 26 that North Korea’s nuclear weapons are no longer merely about deterrence but would be deployed if the country is attacked. President-elect Yoon welcomes the possibility of deploying of US strategic assets to strengthen deterrence against the North. The hawkish turn is not surprising considering that North-South relations failed to make any substantive improvements during President Moon’s five-year tenure as a pro-engagement president. South Koreans, especially Yoon’s supporters, are split on whether inter-Korean dialogue should be continued. They are becoming more interested in developing their own nuclear weapons or at the very least deploying US nuclear weapons in South Korea. Half of South Korean voters support security through alliance with the US, while a third support security through the development of independent nuclear weapons. The nuclear debate will raise tensions on the peninsula. An even bigger change in South Korea’s foreign policy is its policy towards China. President-elect Yoon has accused President Moon of succumbing to China’s economic extortion. Moon had established a policy of “three No’s,” meaning no to additional THAAD missiles in South Korea, no to hosting other US missile defense systems, and no to joining an alliance with Japan and the United States. By contrast, Yoon’s electoral promises include deploying more THAAD and joining the Quadrilateral Dialogue (US, Japan, Australia, India). Polls show that South Koreans hold a low opinion of all of their neighbors but that China has slipped slightly beneath Japan and North Korea in favorability. Even Democratic Party voters feel more negative towards China. While negative attitudes towards China are not unique to Korea, there is an important difference from other countries: the Korean youth dislike China the most, not the older generations. Negative sentiment is less tied to old wounds from the Korean war and more related to ideology and today’s grievances. Younger Koreans, growing up in a liberal democracy and proud of their economic and cultural success, have been involved in campus clashes against Chinese students over Korean support for Hong Kong democrats. Negative attitudes towards China among the youth should alarm investors, as young people provide the voting base for elections to come, and China is the largest trading partner for Korea. Korea’s foreign policy will hew to the American side, at risk to its economy (Chart 4). Chart 4South Korean Geopolitical Risk Rising Under The Radar President-elect Yoon’s policies towards North Korea and China will increase geopolitical risk in East Asia. The biggest beneficiary will be India. Both Korea and Japan need to find a substitute to Chinese markets and labor, which have become less reliable in recent years. South Korea’s newly elected president is aligned with the US and West and less friendly toward China and Russia. He faces a rampant North Korea that feels emboldened by its position of an arsenal of 40-50 deliverable nuclear weapons. The North Koreans now claim that they will respond to any military attack with nuclear force and are testing intercontinental ballistic missiles and possibly a nuclear weapon. The US currently has three aircraft carriers around Korea, despite its urgent foreign policy challenges in Europe and the Middle East. Bottom Line: Stay long JPY-KRW. South Korea’s geopolitical risk premium will remain high. But favor Korean stocks over Taiwanese stocks. Stay Neutral On Hong Kong Stocks Hong Kong’s leadership change will trigger a new bout of unrest (Chart 5). Chart 5Hong Kong: More Turbulence Ahead On April 4, Hong Kong’s incumbent Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, confirmed that she would not seek a second term but would step down on June 30. John Lee, the current chief secretary of Hong Kong, became the only candidate approved to run for election, which is scheduled to be held on May 8. With the backing of the pro-Beijing members in the Election Committee, Lee is expected to secure enough nominations to win the race. Lee served as security secretary from when Carrie Lam took office in 2017 until June 2021. He firmly supported the Hong Kong extradition bill in 2019 and National Security Law in 2020, which provoked historic social unrest in those years. He insisted on taking a tough security stance towards pro-democracy protests. With Lee in power, Hong Kong will face more unrest and tougher crackdowns in the coming years, which will likely bring more social instability. Lee will provoke pro-democracy activists with his policy stances and adherence to Beijing’s party line. For example, his various statements to the news media suggest a dogmatic approach to censorship and political dissent. With the adoption of the National Security Law, Hong Kong’s pro-democracy faction is already deeply disaffected. Carrie Lam was originally elected as a popular leader, with notable support from women, but her popularity fell sharply after the passage of the extradition bill and National Security Law, as well as her mishandling of the Covid-19 outbreak. Her failure to handle the clashes between the Hong Kong people and Beijing damaged public trust in government. Trust never fully recovered when it took another hit recently from the latest wave of the pandemic. Putting another pro-Beijing hardliner in power will exacerbate the trend. Hong Kong equities are vulnerable not merely because of social unrest. During the era of US-China engagement, Hong Kong benefited as the middleman and the symbol that the Communist Party could cooperate within a liberal, democratic, capitalist global order. Hence US-China power struggle removes this special status and causes Hong Kong financial assets to contract mainland Chinese geopolitical risk. As a result of the 2019-2020 crackdown, John Lee and Carrie Lam were among a list of Hong Kong officials sanctioned by the US Treasury Department and State Department in 2020. Now, after the Ukraine war, the US will be on the lookout for any Hong Kong role in helping Russia circumvent sanctions, as well as any other ways in which China might further its strategic aims by means of Hong Kong. Bottom Line: Stay neutral on Hong Kong equities. Favor France Within European Equities French political risk will fall after the presidential election, which recommits the country to geopolitical unity with the US and NATO and potentially pro-productivity structural reforms (Chart 6). France is already a geopolitically secure country so the reduction of domestic political risk should be doubly positive for French assets, though they have already outperformed. And the Russia-West conflict is fueling a risk premium regardless of France’s positive developments. Chart 6France's Domestic Political Risk Will Subside But Russian War Will Keep Geopolitical Risk Elevated The French election ended with a solid victory for the political establishment as we expected. President Emmanuel Macron gaining 58% of the vote to Marine Le Pen’s 42%. Macron beat his opinion polling by 4.5pp while Le Pen underperformed her polls by 4.5pp. A large number of voters abstained, at 28%, compared to 25.5% in 2017. The regional results showed a stark divergence between overseas or peripheral France (where Marine Le Pen even managed to get over half of the vote in several cases) and the core cities of France (where Macron won handily). Macron had won an outright majority in every region in 2017. Macron did best among the young and the old, while Le Pen did best among middle-aged voters. But Macron won every age group except the 50 year-olds, who want to retire early. Macron did well among business executives, managers, and retired people, but Le Pen won among the working classes, as expected. Le Pen won the lowest paid income group, while Macron’s margin of victory rises with each step up the income ladder. Macron’s performance was strong, especially considering the global context. The pandemic knocked several incumbent parties out of power (US, Germany) and required leadership changes in others (Japan, Italy). The subsequent inflation shock now threatens to cause another major political rotation in rapid succession, leaving various political leaders and parties vulnerable in the coming months and years (Australia, the UK, Spain). Only Canada and now France marked exceptions, where post-pandemic elections confirmed the country’s leader. The Ukraine war constitutes yet another shock but it helped Macron, as Le Pen had objective links and sympathies with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Macron’s timing was lucky but his message of structural reform for the sake of economic efficiency still resonates in contemporary France, where change is long overdue – at least compared with Le Pen’s proposal of doubling down on statism, protectionism, and fiscal largesse. The French middle class was never as susceptible to populism as the US, UK, and Italy because it had been better protected from the ravages of globalization. Populism is still a force to be reckoned with, especially if left-wing populists do well in the National Assembly, or if right-wing populists find a fresher face than the Le Pen dynasty. But the failure of populism in the context of pandemic, inflation, and war suggests that France’s political establishment remains well fortified by the economic structure and the electoral system. Whether Macron can sustain his structural reforms depends on legislative elections to be held on June 12-19. Early projections are positive for his party, which should keep a majority. Macron’s new mandate will help. Le Pen’s National Rally and its predecessors may perform better than in the past but that is not saying much as their presence in the National Assembly has been weak. Bottom Line: France is geopolitically secure and has seen a resounding public vote for structural reform that could improve productivity depending on legislative elections. French equities can continue to outperform their European peers over the long run. Our European Investment Strategy recommends French equities ex-consumer stocks, French small caps over large caps, and French aerospace and defense.   Favor Spanish Over Italian Stocks Chart 7Italian And Spanish Political Risk Will Rise But Favor Spanish Stocks What about Spain? It is still a “divided nation” susceptible to a rise in political risk ahead of the general election due by December 10, 2023 (Chart 7). In the past few months, a series of strategic mistakes and internal power struggles have led to a significant decline in the popularity of Spain’s largest opposition party, the People’s Party. Due to public infighting and power struggle, Pablo Casado was forced to step down as the leader of the People’s Party on February 23, as requested by 16 of the party’s 17 regional leaders. It is yet to be seen if the new party leader, Alberto Nunez Feijoo, can reboot People’s Party. The far-right VOX party will benefit from the People Party’s setback. The latter’s misstep in a regional election (Castile & Leon) gave VOX a chance to participate in a regional government for the very first time. Hence VOX’s influence will spread and it will receive greater recognition as an important political force. Meanwhile the ruling Socialist Worker’s Party (PSOE) faces anger from the public amid inflation and high energy prices. However, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s decision to send offensive military weapons to Ukraine is widely supported among major parties, including even his reluctant coalition partner, Unidas Podemos. The People’s Party’s recent infighting gives temporary relief to the ruling party. The Russia-Ukraine issue caused some minor divisions within the government but they are not yet leading to any major political crisis, as nationwide pro-Ukraine sentiment is largely unified. The Andalusia regional election, which is expected this November, will be a check point for Feijoo and a pre-test for next year’s general election. Andalusia is the most populous autonomous community in Spain, consisting about 17% of the seats in the congress (the lower house). The problem for Sanchez and the Socialists is that the stagflationary backdrop will weigh on their support over time. Bottom Line: Spanish political risk is likely to spike sooner rather than later, though Spanish domestic risk it is limited in nature. Madrid faces low geopolitical risk, low energy vulnerability, and is not susceptible to trying to leave the EU or Euro Area. Favor Spanish over Italian stocks. Stay Constructive On South Africa The political and economic status quo is largely unchanged in South Africa and will remain so going into the 2024 national elections. Fiscal discipline will weaken ahead of the election, which should be negative for the rand, but the global commodity shortage and geopolitical risks in Russia and China will probably overwhelm any negative effects from South Africa’s domestic policies. Rising commodity prices have propped up the local equity market and will bring in much-needed revenue into the local economy and government coffers. But structural issues persist. Low growth outcomes amid weak productivity and high unemployment levels will remain the norm. The median voter is increasingly constrained with fewer economic opportunities on the horizon. Pressure will mount on the ruling African National Congress (ANC), fueling civil unrest and adding to overall political risk (Chart 8). Chart 8South Africa's Political Status Quo Is Tactically Positive For Equities And Currency Almost a year has passed since the civil unrest episode of 2021. Covid-19 lockdowns have lifted and the national state of disaster has ended, reducing social tensions. This is evident in the decline of our South Africa GeoRisk indicator from 2021 highs. While we recently argued that fiscal austerity is under way in South Africa, we also noted that fiscal policy will reverse course in time for the 2024 election. In this year’s fiscal budget, the budget deficit is projected to narrow from -6% to -4.2% over the next two years. Government has increased tax revenue collection through structural reforms that are rooting out corruption and wasteful expenditure. But the ANC will have to tap into government spending to shore up lost support come 2024. Already, the ANC have committed to maintaining a special Covid-19 social-grant payment, first introduced in 2020, for another year. This grant, along with other government support, will feature in 2024 and possibly beyond. Unemployment is at 34.3%, its highest level ever recorded. The ANC cannot leave it unchecked. The most prevalent and immediate recourse is to increase social payments and transfers. Given the increasing number of social dependents that higher unemployment creates, government spending will have to increase to address rising unemployment. President Cyril Ramaphosa is still a positive figurehead for the ANC, but the 2021 local elections showed that the ANC cannot rely on the Ramaphosa effect alone. The ANC is also dealing with intra-party fighting. Ramaphosa has yet to assert total control over the party elites, distracting the ANC from achieving its policy objectives. To correct course, Ramaphosa will have to relax fiscal discipline. To this outcome, investors should expect our GeoRisk indicator to register steady increases in political risk moving into 2024. The only reason to be mildly optimistic is that South Africa is distant from geopolitical risk and can continue to benefit from the global bull market in metals. Bottom Line: Maintain a cyclically constructive outlook on South African currency and assets. Tight global commodity markets will support this emerging market, which stands to benefit from developments in Russia and China. Investment Takeaways Stay strategically long gold on geopolitical and inflation risk, despite the dollar rally. Stay long US equities relative to global and UK equities relative to DM-ex-US. Favor global defensives over cyclicals and large caps over small caps. Stay short CNY, TWD, and KRW-JPY. Stay short CZK-GBP. Favor Mexico within emerging markets. Stay long defense and cyber security stocks. We are booking a 5% stop loss on our long Canada / short Saudi Arabia equity trade. We still expect Middle Eastern tensions to escalate and trigger a Saudi selloff.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Jesse Anak Kuri Associate Editor Jesse.Kuri@bcaresearch.com Yushu Ma Research Analyst yushu.ma@bcaresearch.com Guy Russell Senior Analyst GuyR@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1   The campaign in the south suggests that Ukraine will be partitioned, landlocked, and susceptible to blockade in the coming years. If Russia achieves its military objectives, then Ukraine will accept neutrality in a ceasefire to avoid losing more territory. If Russia fails, then it faces humiliation and its attempts to save face will become unpredictable and aggressive. Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix Geopolitical Calendar

Listen to a short summary of this report.         Executive Summary Small Caps Are Looking Attractive Relative To Their Large Cap Peers Adverse supply shocks have pushed down global growth this year, while pushing up inflation. With the war raging in Ukraine and China trying to contain a major Covid outbreak, these supply shocks are likely to persist for the next few months. Things should improve in the second half of the year. Inflation will come down rapidly, probably even more than what markets are discounting. Global growth will reaccelerate as pandemic headwinds abate. The return of Goldilocks will allow the Fed and other central banks to temper their hawkish rhetoric, helping to support equity prices while restraining bond yields. Unfortunately, this benign environment will sow the seeds of its own demise. Falling inflation during the remainder of the year will lift real incomes, leading to increased consumer spending. Inflation will pick up towards the end of 2023, forcing central banks to turn hawkish again. Trade Inception Level Initiation Date Stop Loss Long iShares Core S&P Small Cap ETF (IJR) / SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY) 100 Apr 21/2022 -5% Trade Recommendation: Go long US small caps vs. large caps via the iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF (IJR) and the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY). Bottom Line: Global equities are heading towards a “last hurrah” starting in the second half of this year. Stay overweight stocks on a 12-month horizon. Push or Pull? Economists like to distinguish between “demand-pull” and “cost-push” inflation. The former occurs in response to positive demand shocks while the latter reflects negative supply shocks. In order to tell one from the other, it is useful to look at real wages. When real wages are rising briskly, households tend to spend more, leading to demand-pull inflation. In contrast, when wages fail to keep up with rising prices, it is a good bet that we have cost-push inflation on our hands. Chart 1 shows that real wages have been falling across the major economies over the past year. The decline in real wages has coincided with a steep drop in consumer confidence (Chart 2). This points to cost-push forces as the main culprits behind today’s high inflation rates. Chart 1Real Wages Are Declining Chart 2Consumer Confidence Has Soured A close look at the breakdown of recent inflation figures supports this conclusion. The US headline CPI rose by 8.5% year-over-year in March. The bulk of the inflation occurred in supply-constrained categories such as food, energy, and vehicles (Chart 3). Chart 3The Acceleration In Inflation Has Been Driven By Pandemic And War-Impacted Categories The Toilet Paper Economy When the pandemic began, shoppers rushed out to buy essential household supplies including, most famously, toilet paper. Chart 4In A Break From The Past, Goods Prices Soared During The Pandemic The toilet paper used in offices is somewhat different than the sort used at home. So, to some extent, work-from-home (and do other stuff-at-home) arrangements did boost the demand for consumer-grade toilet paper. However, a much more important factor was household psychology. People scrambled to buy toilet paper because others were doing the same. As often occurs in prisoner-dilemma games, society moved from one Nash equilibrium – where everyone was content with the amount of toilet paper they had – to another equilibrium where they wanted to hold much more paper than they previously did. What has gone largely unnoticed is that the toilet paper fiasco was replicated across much of the global supply chain. Worried that they would not have enough intermediate goods on hand to maintain operations, firms began to hoard inputs. Retailers, anxious at the prospect of barren shelves, put in bigger purchase orders than they normally would have. All this happened at a time when demand was shifting from services to goods, and the pandemic was disrupting normal goods production. No wonder the prices of goods – especially durable goods — jumped (Chart 4).   Peak Inflation? The war in Ukraine could continue to generate supply disruptions over the coming months. The Covid outbreak in China could also play havoc with the global supply chain. While the number of Chinese Covid cases has dipped in recent days, Chart 5 highlights that 27 out of 31 mainland Chinese provinces are still reporting new cases, up from 14 provinces in the beginning of February. The number of ships stuck outside of Shanghai has soared (Chart 6). Chart 527 Out Of 31 Chinese Provinces Are Reporting New Cases, Up From 14 Provinces In The Beginning Of February Chart 6The Clogged-Up Port Of Shanghai Chart 7Inflation Will Decelerate This Year Thanks To Base Effects Nevertheless, the peak in inflation has probably been reached in the US. For one thing, base effects will push down year-over-year inflation (Chart 7). Monthly core CPI growth rates were 0.86% in April, 0.75% in May, and 0.80% in June of 2021. These exceptionally high prints will fall out of the 12-month average during the next few months. More importantly, goods inflation will abate as spending shifts back toward services. Chart 8 shows that spending on goods remains well above the pre-pandemic trend in the US, while spending on services remains well below. Excluding autos, US retail inventories are about 5% above their pre-pandemic trend (Chart 9). Core goods prices fell in March for the first time since February 2021. Fewer pandemic-related disruptions, and hopefully a stabilization in the situation in Ukraine, could set the stage for sharply lower inflation and a revival in global growth in the second half of this year. How long will this Goldilocks environment last? Our guess is that it will endure until the second half of next year, but probably not much beyond then. As inflation comes down over the coming months, real income growth will rise. What began as cost-push inflation will morph into demand-pull inflation by the end of 2023. The Fed will need to resume hiking at that point, potentially bringing rates to over 4% in 2024. Chart 8Spending On Services Remains Well Below The Pre-Pandemic Trend, While Spending On Goods Is Above It Chart 9Shelves Are Well Stocked In The US Investment Implications Wayne Gretzky famously said that he always tries to skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been. Macro investors should follow the same strategy: Ask what the global economy will look like in six months and invest accordingly. The past few months have been tough for the global economy and financial markets. Last week, bullish sentiment fell to the lowest level in 30 years in the American Association of Individual Investors poll (Chart 10). Global growth optimism dropped in April to a record low in the BofA Merrill Lynch Fund Manager Survey.    Chart 10AAII Survey: Equity Bulls Are In Short Supply Chart 11The Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated Yet, a Goldilocks environment of falling inflation and supply-side led growth awaits in the second half of the year. Even if this environment does not last beyond the end of 2023, it could provide a “last hurrah” for global equities. Despite the spike in bond yields, the earnings yield on stocks still exceeds the real bond yield by 5.4 percentage points in the US, and by 7.8 points outside the US (Chart 11). TINA’s siren song may have faded but it is far from silent. Global equities have about 10%-to-15% upside from current levels over a 12-month horizon. We recommend that investors increase allocations to non-US stock markets, value stocks, and small caps over the coming months (see trade recommendation below). Consistent with our view that the neutral rate of interest is higher than widely believed in the US and elsewhere, we expect the 10-year Treasury yield to eventually rise to around 4% in 2024. However, with US inflation likely to trend lower in the second half of this year, we do not expect much upside for yields over a 12-month horizon. If anything, the fact that bond sentiment in the latest BofA Merrill Lynch survey was the most bearish in 20 years suggests that the near-term risk to yields is to the downside.  Trade Idea: Go Long US Small Caps Versus Large Caps Small caps have struggled of late. Over the past 12 months, the S&P 600 small cap index has declined 3%, even as the S&P has managed to claw out a 5% gain. At this point, small caps are starting to look relatively cheap (Chart 12). The S&P 600 is trading at 14-times forward earnings compared to 19-times for the S&P 500. Notably, analysts expect small cap earnings to rise more over the next 12 months, as well as over the long term, than for large caps. Chart 12Small Caps Are Looking Attractive Relative To Their Large Cap Peers Chart 13Small Caps Tend To Outperform When Growth Is Picking Up And The Dollar Is Depreciating Small caps tend to perform best in settings where growth is accelerating and the US dollar is weakening (Chart 13). Economic growth should benefit from a supply-side boost later this year as pandemic headwinds fade and more low-skilled workers rejoin the labor market. With inflation set to decline, the need for the Fed to generate hawkish surprises will temporarily subside, putting downward pressure on the dollar. Investors should consider going long the S&P 600 via the iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF (IJR) versus the S&P 500 via the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY). Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on  LinkedIn Twitter   Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Special Report

Executive Summary The Declining Value Of An Old Friendship India may buy cheap oil from Russia, but oil alone cannot expand this partnership. India needs to maintain a balance of power against China and Pakistan. With Russia’s heft set to decline, India will be compelled to explore a configuration with America. India will slowly yet surely move into America’s sphere of influence. Strong geopolitical as well as economic incentives exist for both sides to develop partnership. The US’s grand strategy will continue to collide with that of Russia and China. China will increasingly align with Russia and is doomed to stay entangled in a strategic conflict with India. With India a promising emerging market set to cleave to America, we reiterate our strategic buy call on India. Tactically however we are bearish on India. We also recommend investors go strategically long Indian tech / short Chinese tech. This pair trade is likely to keep rising on a secular basis. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG INDIAN TECH / CHINESE TECH EQUITIES 2022-04-21   Bottom Line: For reasons of geopolitics as well as macroeconomics, we maintain our constructive view on India and our negative view on China on a strategic time frame. On a tactical timeframe, we remain sellers of India given cyclical political and macro risks. Feature Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has forced all players at the global geopolitical table to show their hand. The one major player at the table who is yet to show her cards is India. Which side India choses matters. Its geopolitical rise is one of the many reasons we live in a brave new multipolar world. India will gain influence in the global economy as a large buyer of oil and guns and as a user of tech platforms and capital. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyFrom Nixon-Mao To Putin-Xi The situation is complicated by mixed signals. India has played a geopolitically neutral or “non-aligned” role for most of its time since independence in 1947. Those who believe India will stay neutral point to the fact that India has continued buying oil from Russia and has abstained from voting on both anti-Russia and anti-Ukrainian resolutions at the United Nations. Those who predict that India will side with Russia have trouble explaining how India will get along with China, which committed to a “no limits” strategic partnership with Russia prior to the invasion. Those who speculate that India will align with the US have trouble explaining India’s persistent ties with Russia and the Biden administration’s threat of punishment for those who help Russia circumvent US sanctions. In this report we argue that the Indo-Russian friendship is destined to fade over a long-term, strategic horizon. The reason is simple: Russia’s geopolitical power is fading and hence it can no longer help India meet its regional security goals. The growing Russia-China alignment will only alienate India further. Hence, we expect the relationship between India and Russia to be reduced to a transactional status – mainly trade in oil and guns over the next few years, while strategic realities will drive India to tighten relations with the US and its Asian allies. Three geopolitical forces will break down the camaraderie between India and Russia, namely: (1) A collision in the grand strategies of America with that of both China and Russia, (2) India’s need to align with the US to underwrite its own regional security, and (3) China’s rising distrust of India as India aligns with the US and its allies. In fact, we expect China and India to stay embroiled in a strategic conflict over the next few years. Any thaw in their relations will be temporary at best. The rest of this report explains and quantifies these forces. We conclude with actionable investment conclusions. Let’s dive straight in. US Versus China-Russia: A Grand Strategy Collision “For the enemy is the communist system itself – implacable, insatiable, unceasing in its drive for world domination … For this is not a struggle for supremacy of arms alone – it is also a struggle for supremacy between two conflicting ideologies: freedom under God versus ruthless, Godless tyranny. “ – John F. Kennedy, Remarks at Mormon Tabernacle, Utah (September 1960) Chart 1China’s Is An Export-Powered Economic Heavyweight It’s been six decades since these words were spoken and today the quotation is more relevant than at any time since the Cold War ended in 1991. The excerpt captures how the Biden administration has positioned itself with respect to Russia and China, only replacing “communist” with “autocratic” in Russia’s case. The Ukraine war helps America advance its grand strategy with respect to Russia. The Ukraine war is steadily draining Russia’s already limited economic might. Western sanctions aim to weaken Russia further. Russia’s military capabilities are now in greater doubt than before, so that its only remaining geopolitical strengths are nuclear weapons and, significantly, its leverage as an energy supplier. With Russia weakened, yet capable of reinforcing China, America will focus more intensely on China over the coming years and the breakdown in US-China relations will only accelerate. China is a genuine economic competitor to the United States (Chart 1). Its strategic rise worries America. To make matters worse, America poses a unique threat to China. China relies heavily on energy imports (Chart 2) from the Middle East (Chart 3). This is a source of great vulnerability as China’s fuel imports must traverse seas that America controls (Map 1). During peace time, and periods of robust US-China strategic engagement, this vulnerability is not an issue. But China is acutely aware that America has the capability to choke China’s energy access at will in the event of hostilities, just as it did to Japan in World War II. Russia has managed to wage war in Ukraine, against US wishes, since it is a net energy supplier to Europe and the global economy. Chart 2China And India Rely On Imports For Energy​​​​​ Chart 3India And China Both Depend On Middle East For Oil​​​​​​ Map 1US Military Footprint In Middle East Threatens China … Yet US Presence In South Asia Is Weak Atop China’s fuel-supply related insecurities, America has begun a strategic pivot to Asia in recent years. For instance, America has pulled troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, declared a trade war on China, and strengthening strategic alliances and partnerships with regional geopolitical powers like India and Australia (Table 1). The US has retained its alliance with the Philippines despite an adverse government there, while South Korea has just elected a pro-American president again. With Japan, South Korea and Australia aligned militarily with the US, China’s naval power pales in comparison (Chart 4). Table 1America’s Influence In Asia Is Rising Chart 4China’s Naval Power Pales Versus US Allies In Asia Now China cannot watch America refurbish its grand strategy in Asia silently. Given China’s need for supply security, geopolitical independence, and regional influence, Beijing will double down on building its influence in Asia and in the eastern hemisphere. Against this backdrop of US-China competition, military conflict becomes increasingly likely, especially in the form of “proxy wars” involving China’s neighbors but conceivably even in the form of US-China naval warfare. China’s plans to modernize and enhance its economic prowess will add to America’s worries (Chart 5). A bipartisan consensus of American lawmakers is focused on reviving America’s economic strength but simultaneously limiting China’s benefit by restricting Chinese imports and American high-tech exports (Chart 6). Since Beijing cannot afford to base its national strategy on the hope of lingering American engagement, US-China trade relations will weaken regardless of which party controls the White House. Chart 5China’s Growing Might Worries America​​​​​​ Chart 6US Growth Does Not Equal Growth In Imports From China ​​​​​​ The consensus in global financial media (which we never bought) held that the Biden administration would reduce tensions with China – but the détente never occurred and the remaining window for détente is limited by the uncertainty of the 2024 election. The US is currently occupied with Russia but threatening to impose secondary sanctions on China if it provides military assistance or circumvents sanctions. The Russo-Ukrainian war has led to an energy price shock that hurts an industrial economy like China’s. For the rest of this year China’s leaders will be consumed with managing the energy shock, a nationwide Covid-19 outbreak, and the important political reshuffle this fall. Only in 2023 will Beijing have room for maneuver when it comes to the US. But the US cannot return to engagement, which strengthens China’s economy, while China cannot open up to the US economy and become more exposed to future US sanctions. Bottom Line: A grand strategy collision between the US and China is certain. US dominance of sea routes that China uses for energy imports necessarily intimidates China. America’s pivot to Asia threatens China’s regional influence. This will prompt China to restrict American advances in strategic geographies —and not only the Taiwan Strait but also, as we will see, in South Asia. US-India Strategic Alignment: Only A Matter Of Time “If they [nation states] wish to survive, they must be willing to go to war to preserve a balance against the growing hegemonic power of the period.” – Nicholas J. Spykman, America's Strategy in World Politics (Harcourt, Brace and Co, 1942) For reasons of strategy, China will continue to build its influence in South Asia. South Asia offers prospects of sea access to the Indian Ocean, namely via Pakistan. This factor could ease China’s fuel supply insecurities. Also, penetrating northern India helps China set up a noose around India’s neck, thus neutralizing a potential enemy and US ally. In short China will pursue a two-pronged strategy of Eurasian development and naval expansion, both of which threaten India. Against this backdrop, India needs US support to counter Pakistan to its west, China’s latest intrusions into its eastern flank (Map 2), and China’s maritime challenge. India has historically spent generously on defense, but its military might pales in comparison to that of China. Even partial support from America would help India make some progress toward a balance of power in South Asia (Chart 7). Map 2China’s Newfound Interest In India’s Eastern Flank Chart 7America Can Provide Military Heft To India​​​​​​ Chart 8US Is A Key Trading Partner For India​​​​​​ There’s another reason why US alignment makes sense for India. Much like China, India is highly import-dependent for its fuel needs (Chart 2). Given India’s high reliance on the Middle East for energy, India stands to benefit from America’s solid military footprint in this region (Map 1). The US too has a motive in exploring this alliance. India can provide a strategic foothold on the Eurasian rimland. America will value this new access route to Eurasia because America knows that its military footprint in South Asia is surprisingly weak – a weakness it needs to address against the backdrop of China’s increasing influence in the region (Map 1). Meaningful economic interests also underpin the US-India relationship. India and the US appear like sparring partners from time to time. The US may raise issues of human rights violations in India and the two may bicker over trade. However there exist strong economic incentives for the two countries to keep their differences under check and develop a long-term strategic partnership. The US is a major user of India’s software services and buys nearly a fifth of India’s merchandise exports. The trading relationship that India shares with the US is far more developed than India’s trading relationship with China and Russia (Chart 8). Capital is a factor of production that India desperately needs to finance its high growth. America and its allies are also major suppliers of capital to India (Chart 9). India is averse to granting China the political influence that would go along with major capital infusions and direct investments. Chart 9US And Its Allies Are Major Suppliers Of Capital To India​​​​​​ Chart 10India Offers US Firms Access To High Growth​​​​​​ Chart 11India Is A Key Market For American Big Tech India on its part is a large marketplace which offers high growth prospects (Chart 10) and remains open and accessible to American corporations (unlike say Russia or China). The growth element is something that American firms will value more over time, as the American economy is mature and has a lower potential growth rate. Most importantly if the US imposes sanctions on India, then two key business lobbies are sure to mitigate the damage. In specific: Since India is a key potential market for American tech firms (Chart 11), Big Tech will always desire amicable Indo-US relations. Since India is the third largest buyer of defense goods globally, American defense suppliers will have similar intentions. In both cases, US policy planners will support these industries’ lobbying efforts due to the grand strategic considerations outlined above. Bottom Line: India will slowly yet surely move into America’s sphere of influence. Notwithstanding persistent differences, the Indo-US relationship will strengthen over a strategic timeframe. Strong geopolitical motives as well as notable economic incentives exist for both sides to develop this alignment. Indo-Russian Alignment: Destined To Fade The Indo-Russian friendship can be traced back to the second half of the 20th century. The fulcrum was the fact that Russia was a formidable land-based power and provided an offset against threats from China and Pakistan (Chart 12). The finest hour of this friendship perhaps came in 1971 when Russia sided with India in its war with Pakistan. India’s citizens hold an unusually favorable opinion of Russia (Chart 13). Chart 12The Declining Value Of An Old Friendship​​​​​​ Chart 13Indians Hold A Favorable Opinion Of Russians ​​​​​​ Despite this rich past, the Indo-Russia friendship is doomed to fade over a strategic timeframe. Even if  Russia’s share in Indian oil rises from current low levels of 2%, this glue alone cannot hold the Indo-Russian relationship together for one key reason: Russia’s geopolitical might has been waning and Russia can no longer help India establish a balance of power against China and Pakistan (Table 2). In fact, since 2006, the Russo-Indian partnership has been commanding lower geopolitical power than that of China (Chart 12). Table 2Russia’s Military Heft Is Of Limited Use To India Today Managing regional security is a key strategic concern for India. As Russia’s geopolitical power wanes so will India’s utility of Russia as an effective guarantor of India’s security. Russia’s war in Ukraine is ominous in this regard, as Russian armed forces were forced to retreat from Kyiv, while the country’s already bleak economic prospects have worsened under western sanctions. The solidification of the China-Russia axis will alienate India further (Chart 14). China is essential to Russia’s economy now while Moscow is essential to China’s Eurasian strategy of bypassing American naval dominance to reduce its supply insecurity. Russia holds the keys to Central Asia, from a military-security point of view, and hence also to the Middle East. Furthermore, limited economic bonds exist to prevent India and Russia from falling out. Russia accounts for a smidgen of India’s trade (Chart 8). India is Russia’s largest arms client (accounting for +20% of its arms sales) but this reliance could also decline over time: The Indian government has been pursuing a range of policies to increase the indigenous production of arms. This is a strategic goal that would also reinforce India’s economic need for more effective manufacturing capabilities. Russia’s own defense franchise had been coming under pressure, even before the Ukraine war (Chart 15). On the contrary, Western arms manufacturers’ franchise has been steadily growing. Chart 14China-Russia Axis Will Alienate India ​​​​​ Chart 15The Rise & Rise Of Western Arms Manufacturers ​​​​​​ While the US may look the other way in the short term when India buys arms from Russia, over a period of time the US is bound to pull India away by using a combination of sticks (mild sanctions) and carrots (heavy discounts). Two aforementioned external factors will also work against the Indo-Russia relationship namely (1) The Russo-Chinese alignment and its clash with US grand strategy and (2) The coming-to-life of a US-India strategic alignment. Bottom Line: India’s need for cheap oil will preserve basic Indo-Russian relations for some time. But oil alone cannot drive a deeper strategic alignment. Regional security concerns are paramount for India. Russia’s geopolitical decline will force India to explore an alignment with America, which will offer India security in the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf in the face of China’s emergence in this region. Is A Realignment In Indo-China Relations Possible? But why should India not join the other Asian giants to balance against America’s threat of global dominance? Would such a bloc not secure India’s interests? And what if the US imposes harsh sanctions for India’s continued trade with Russia and strategic neutrality? Or what if a future US administration grows restless and attempts to force India to choose sides sooner rather than later? Even if the US offends India, it will only lead to a temporary improvement in India’s ties with the China-Russia alliance. This is because America stands to lose if India cleaves towards the Sino-Russian alliance and would thus quickly correct its policy. In specific: Security Interests: America will risk losing all influence in South Asia if India were to cleave towards China. India provides a key foothold for America to control China’s regional ascendance especially given that the US has now withdrawn from Afghanistan and its bilateral relations with Pakistan are weak. Business Interests: India’s movement into the China-Russia sphere of influence can have adverse business implications for American corporations and US allies, given that the US is abandoning the Chinese market over time, while India is a large and fast-growing consumer of American tech exports and services. India could emerge as a major buyer of American defense goods and will import more and more energy provided by the US and its partners in the Persian Gulf. These business groups will lobby for the withdrawal of US sanctions on India given India’s long-term potential. Meanwhile any improvement in Indo-Chinese relations will have a limited basis. In specific: Ascendant Nationalism In China And India: China’s declining potential GDP is motivating a rise in nationalism and an assertive foreign policy. Meanwhile India’s inability to create plentiful jobs for a young and growing population is also fuelling a wave of nationalism. A historic turn toward Sino-Indian economic engagement would require the domestic political ability to embrace and promote each other’s well-being. Pakistan Factor: India’s eastern neighbor Pakistan is controlled by its military. The military’s raison d'être is enforced by maintaining an aggressive stance towards India, while pursuing economic development through whatever other means are available. As long as Pakistan’s military stays influential its stance towards India will be hostile. And as long as Pakistan’s economy remains weak (Chart 16), its reliance on China will remain meaningful (Chart 17). Chart 16Pakistan: High Military Influence, Low Economic Vigor ​​​​​​ Chart 17China & Pakistan: Iron Brothers?​​​​​​ Chart 18Indians View China And Pakistan Negatively   China also benefits from its alliance with Pakistan because it provides an alternative entry point into India and access to the Indian Ocean. Fundamental Distrust: For reasons of history, Indians harbor a negative opinion of both Pakistan and China (Chart 18). This factor reinforces the first point that any Indian administration will see limited political dividends from developing a long-term alignment with China or with Pakistan. Bottom Line: If any Indo-Chinese détente materializes owing to harsh US sanctions, which we do not expect, the result will be temporary. America has limited incentives to push India towards the Sino-Russian camp. More importantly, China and India will stay entangled in a strategic conflict for reasons of both history and geography. Investment Conclusions Chart 19Sell India Tactically But Buy India On A Strategic Horizon The historic Indo-Russia relationship will weaken over the next few years as India and Russia explore new alignments with USA and China respectively. The relationship may not collapse entirely but has limited basis to grow given Russia’s declining geopolitical clout. Indo-American economic interests are set to deepen not just for reasons of security. India may consider looking for alternatives to Russian arms in the American defense industry while American Big Tech will be keen to grow their footprint in India. With India set to cleave to America, a country whose geopolitical power remains unparalleled today, we reiterate our constructive long-term investment view on India (Chart 19). However, tactically we remain worried about near-term geopolitical and macro headwinds that India must confront. China will strengthen relations with Russia over the next few years. It needs Russia’s help to execute its Eurasian strategy and to diversify its sources of fuel supply, over the long run. Given that the US and its allies will be engaged in a conflict with China over a strategic horizon, we reiterate our strategic sell call on China. Tactically we are neutral on Chinese stocks, given that they have already sold off sharply in accordance with our views over the past two years. In view of both these calls, we urge clients with a holding period mandate of more than 12 months to reduce exposure to Chinese assets and increase exposure to Indian assets. We also recommend investors go strategically long Indian tech / short Chinese tech. This pair trade is likely to keep rising on a secular basis.   Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist ritika.mankar@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix

Executive Summary Brent Stable As Demand + Supply Fall Oil demand growth will slow this year and next by 1.6mm b/d and 1mm b/d, respectively. These expectations are in line with sharp downgrades in World Bank and IMF economic forecasts, which cite pressures from the Ukraine War, COVID-19-induced lockdowns in China, and central-bank policy efforts to contain rising inflation. Lower oil demand will be offset by lower supply from Russia and OPEC 2.0, which now are ~ 1.5mm b/d behind on pledges to restore production taken from the market during the pandemic. In 2022, US production will increase ~750k b/d year-on-year. The strategic relationship between the US and core OPEC 2.0 producers Saudi Arabia and the UAE is fraying. The Core's unwillingness to increase production despite pleas from the Biden administration likely motivated the US’s record SPR release of 180mm barrels (1mm b/d over 6 months). This will be augmented by another 60mm-barrel release of refined products by IEA member states. The EU's threat to stop importing half of Russia's 5mm b/d of oil exports would, if realized, force Russian storage to fill, and lead to production shut-ins. Oil prices would surge to destroy enough demand to cover this loss. Our base-case Brent forecast is at $94/bbl this year and $88/bbl in 2023, leaving our forecast over the period mostly unchanged. Bottom Line: Despite major shifts in global oil supply and demand over the past month, oil markets have remained mostly balanced. We remain long commodity index exposure via the S&P GSCI index, and the COMT ETF. We also are long oil and gas producer exposure via the XOP, and base metals producers via the PICK and XME ETFs. Feature Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyDesperate Times, Desperate Measures: Aramco And The Saudi Security Dilemma Oil demand and supply growth are weakening on the back of the Ukraine War, COVID-19-induced lockdowns in China, and central-bank efforts to contain rising inflation. We expect global demand growth to slow this year and next by 1.6mm b/d and 1mm b/d, respectively, in line with downgrades in IMF and World Bank global growth forecasts.1 Demand will fall to 100mm b/d on average this year, down from our earlier expectation of 101.5mm b/d published in March. For next year, we expect global oil consumption to come in at 102.2mm b/d, down from our March estimate of 103.2mm b/d (Chart 1). EM consumption, the engine of oil-demand growth, falls to 54.2mm b/d vs. 55.8mm b/d in last month's forecast for 2022 demand. We have been steadily lowering our estimate for 2022 Chinese demand this year due to its zero-tolerance COVID policy and its associated lockdowns, and again take it down 250k b/d in this month's balances to 15.7mm b/d on average. In our estimates, Chinese oil demand grows 2.6% from its 2021 level of 15.3mm b/d. We have been expecting DM oil consumption to flatten out this year, following massive fiscal and monetary stimulus fueling oil demand during and after the pandemic, and continue to expect it to come in at ~ 45.7mm b/d this year. Chart 1Sharply Lower Oil Demand Expected Oil Supply Gets Complicated Oil supply will continue to weaken along with demand this year, primarily due to sanctions imposed on Russia by Western buyers following its invasion of Ukraine. Russia's production reportedly was just above 10mm b/d. Estimates of Russian production losses over 2022-23 range from 1mm b/d to as much as 1.7mm b/d over at the US EIA. The outlier here is the IEA, which warns Russian production will fall 1.5mm b/d this month, then accelerate to 3mm b/d beginning in May. In our base-case modeling, we expect Russian output to average 9.8mm b/d in 2022 and 9.9mm b/d next year (Chart 2). Tracking Russia's production became more complicated, as the government this week announced it no longer would be reporting these data. Prices and satellite services will be needed to impute Russia's output in the future. Russia and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) are the putative leaders of OPEC 2.0 (otherwise known as OPEC+). In the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, OPEC, the original cartel led by KSA, continues to maintain solidarity with Russia, referring in its Monthly Oil Market Report (MOMR), for example, to the "conflict between Russian and Ukraine," or the "conflict in Eastern Europe" – not the war in Ukraine. This would suggest KSA and its allies continue to place a high value in maintaining the OPEC 2.0 structure, which has shown itself to be an extremely useful organization for managing production and production declines among non-Core states – i.e., those states outside the Gulf that cannot increase output, or are managing declining production due to lack of capital, labor or both (Chart 3). Chart 2Brent Stable As Demand + Supply Fall Chart 3OPEC 2.0 Remains Useful To KSA And Russia The strategic relationship between core OPEC 2.0 producers capable of maintaining higher production – KSA and the UAE – and the US is fraying. Both states showed no interest in increasing production despite pleas from the Biden administration following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and have shown a propensity to expand their diplomatic and financial relationships, e.g., exploring oil sales denominated in Chinese RMB, beyond their US relationships.2 This likely motivated the US’s record SPR release of 180mm barrels (1mm b/d over 6 months). This will be augmented by another 60mm-barrel release of refined products by IEA member states. Outside the OPEC 2.0 coalition, we continue to expect higher output from the US, led by shale oil production. According to Rystad Energy, horizontal drilling permits in the Permian basin hit an all-time high in March.3 If these permits are converted into new projects, oil supply growth will be boosted starting 2023. The US government’s recent announcement to lease around 144,000 acres of land to oil and gas companies – in a bid to bring down high US oil prices – also will spur supply growth towards the beginning of next year.4 These bullish factors are balanced out by nearer-term headwinds. Bottlenecks resulting from pent-up demand released following global lockdowns, the Russia-Ukraine crisis, and investor-induced capital austerity means US oil producers will not be able to turn on the taps as quickly this year as they've been able to do in days gone by. Given the near-term bearish factors and longer-term bullish factors, we expect total US crude production to grow slower this year and ramp up at a faster pace the next. US shale output (i.e., Lower 48 states (L48) ex Gulf of Mexico) is expected to average 9.73mm b/d in 2022 and 10.53mm b/d in 2023 (Chart 4). Total US crude supply is expected to average 11.92mm b/d and 12.74mm b/d, respectively, over this period. Additional production increases are expected from Canada, Brazil and Norway. Chart 4Shales Continue To Pace US Onshore Output Increases Upside Risk Remains KSA's and the UAE's strategy to hold off on production increases despite US entreaties upends one of our expectations – i.e., that these state would increase production as the deficit in OPEC 2.0 output being returned to the market widened. We are coming around to the idea this could represent a desire to diversify their exposure to USD payments and assets, which, as Russia's invasion of Ukraine demonstrated, can become liabilities in an economic war. This also would begin to reduce the heavy reliance KSA and the UAE place on the US vis-à-vis defending its interests.5 Lastly, we would observe KSA's and the UAE's spare capacity is being husbanded closely, given it constitutes most, if not all, of OPEC 2.0's 3.4mm b/d of spare capacity (Chart 5). There are multiple scenarios in which this spare capacity would be needed by global markets to address production outages. One of the most imposing is an EU embargo on Russian oil imports floated by France this week, which triggers a cut-off of natural gas supplies by Russia to the EU.6 An embargo of Russian oil imports by the EU is a very low-probability event, but it is not vanishingly small. The EU imports about 2.5mm b/d of Russia's crude oil exports. The EU's threat to stop importing half of Russia's 5mm b/d of oil exports would, if realized, force Russian pipelines and storage to fill, and would lead to production shut-ins. Oil prices would have to surge to destroy enough demand to cover this loss of supply, even after OPEC's spare capacity was released into the market. If realized, such an event also would throw the world into recession, in our view. The prospect of a cut-off of Russian oil imports by the EU was addressed last month by Energy Minister Alexander Novak, who said such an act would prompt Russia to shut down natural gas exports to the EU.7 If Russia follows through on such a threat, it would shut down much of the EU's industrial and manufacturing activity. The experience of this past winter – when aluminum and zinc smelters were forced to shut as natural gas prices surged and made electricity from gas-fired generation too expensive for their operations – remains fresh in the mind of the market. An oil-import ban by the EU followed by a cut-off of natgas exports by Russia almost surely would spike volatility in these markets (Chart 6). In addition, a global recession would be a foregone conclusion, in our view. Chart 5OPEC Spare Capacity Concentrated In KSA, UAE Chart 6Oil+ Gas Volatility Would Spike If EU Cuts Russian Oil Imports Markets Remain Roughly Balanced … For Now Our supply-demand modeling indicates production losses are roughly balanced by consumption losses at present (Chart 7). If anything, the lost demand slightly outweighs the loss of production, when we run our econometric models. However, we are maintaining a $10/bbl risk premium in our estimates for 2022-23 Brent prices, which keeps our current forecast close to last month's levels. Persistent strength in the USD, particularly in the USD real effective exchange rate, acts as a headwind on prices by making oil more expensive ex-US (Chart 8). We expect this to continue, given the Fed's avowed commitment to raise policy rates to choke off inflation, which, all else equal, will make USD-denominated returns attractive. Chart 7Markets Remain Mostly Balanced Chart 8Strong USD Restrains Oil Prices Investment Implications Despite the major shifts in oil supply and demand over the past month, markets have remained mostly balanced (Table 1). Falling Russian output and weak OPEC 2.0 production – where most states are managing production declines – is being exacerbated by falling Chinese demand and SPR releases from the US and IEA. The market does not yet need the 1.3mm b/d of Iranian output that is being held at bay due to a diplomatic impasse between the US and Iran, which we believe will persist. With overall economic output growth slowing – per the forecasts of the major supranational agencies (WTO, IMF, World Bank) – weaker demand can be expected to persist. Table 1BCA Global Oil Supply - Demand Balances (MMb/d, Base Case Balances) To Dec23 This is not to say upside risk is non-existent. A move by the EU to ban Russian oil imports could set in motion sharply higher oil and gas prices and a deep EU recession, as discussed above. This could trigger an immediate need for OPEC spare capacity and those Iranian barrels waiting to return to export markets. We remain long commodity index exposure via the S&P GSCI index, and the COMT ETF. We also are long oil and gas producer exposure via the XOP, and base metals producers via the PICK and XME ETFs.   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com   Commodity Round-Up Energy: Bullish Russia's concentration of exposure to OECD Europe – as customers for its energy exports – exceeds the latter's concentration of imports from Russia by a wide margin. Russia produced 10.1mm b/d of crude and condensates in 2021. Of the 4.7mm b/d of this Russia exported last year, OECD Europe was its largest customer, accounting for 50% of total oil exports, according to the US EIA (Chart 9). On the natgas side, more than one-third of the ~ 25 Tcf of natgas produced by Russia last year was exported via pipeline or as LNG, based on 2021 data from the EIA. This amounted to almost 9 Tcf. Most of this – 84% – was exported via pipeline to the OECD Europe, with the biggest customers being Germany, Turkey, Italy and France. As is the case with crude oil and liquids, OECD Europe is Russia's biggest natgas customer, accounting for ~ 75% of exports in either gaseous or liquid form. There is an argument to be made Russia needs OECD Europe as much or more than the latter needs Russia. Ags/Softs: Neutral Grains and vegetable oils are at multi-year or all-time highs, as a result of the war in Ukraine. This week, corn futures hit the highest since 2012, while wheat futures surged amid the ongoing war and unfavorable weather in U.S. growing areas. The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization's Food Price Index rose 12.6% from February, its highest level since 1990. According to the FAO, the war in Ukraine was largely responsible for the 17.1% rise in the price of grains, including wheat and corn. Together, Russia and Ukraine account for around 30% and 20% of global wheat and corn exports. The cost of fertilizers has increased by almost 30% in many places due to the supply disruptions caused by the war and the tightening of natural gas markets, which is being driven by EU efforts to diversify away from Russian imports of the commodity.8 Planting is expected to be very irregular in the upcoming grain-sowing months, navigate through much higher prices for fuel and fertilizers (Chart 10). Chart 9 Chart 10     Footnotes 1     Please see the IMF's April 2022 World Economic Outlook report entitled War Sets Back the Global Recovery, and the World Bank's Spring Meetings 2022 Media Roundtable Opening Remarks by World Bank Group President David Malpass, posted on April 18, 2022. 2     Please see, e.g., Saudi Arabia Considers Accepting Yuan Instead of Dollars for Chinese Oil Sales published by wsj.com on March 15, 2022.   3    Please see Permian drilling permits hit all-time high in March, signaling production surge on the horizon, published by Rystad Energy on April 13, 2022. 4    Please see Joe Biden resumes oil and gas leases on federal land, published by the Financial Times on April 15, 2022. 5    Please see Desperate Times, Desperate Measures: Aramco And The Saudi Security Dilemma, which we published on January 14, 2014. In that report, we noted, "… the U.S. has decided to stop micromanaging the Middle East. The latter policy sucked in too much of Washington's material resources, blood and treasure, at a time when regional powers like China and Russia were looking to establish their own spheres of influence in East Asia and Eurasia respectively." Building deeper commercial relationships with China also would bind both states together in terms of addressing KSA's security concerns, given China's existing relationships with Iran. This is a longer-term strategy, in our view. 6    Please see An EU embargo on Russian oil in the works - French minister, published by reuters.com on April 19, 2022. 7     Please see War in Ukraine: Russia says it may cut gas supplies if oil ban goes ahead, published by bbc.co.uk on March 8, 2022. 8    Please refer to Food prices soar to record levels on Ukraine war disruptions, published by abcNEWS on April 8, 2022.   Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022

Executive Summary Copper Will Remain Tight Even In Recession Supply-chain disruptions arising from Russia's invasion of Ukraine and demand hits from lockdowns in Shanghai are increasing the odds of a global recession, which can be seen in the WTO's latest economic forecast. Cyclical base-metals demand, particularly copper's, will slow in a recession. Still, markets will remain physically short and well bid, as incremental demand from the global renewable-energy and defense buildouts gathers strength. Global GDP growth will return to trend in 2024. Renewables and defense-related demand will continue to power ahead. Physical deficits will persist. Copper-supply growth increasingly is tied to local political risk – e.g., Chile's government sued miners over water-use disputes this month. Miners now are seeking assurances investment will be protected before committing to higher capex. The environmental stain arising from the global competition for metals will redound to the benefit oil and gas E+Ps involved in natural gas and hydrogen production. Bottom Line: A higher likelihood of a global recession will not diminish the drive to secure base metals critical to renewables and defense, particularly copper. This will keep metals bid and inventories strained. Stagflation likely ensues. We remain long commodity-index exposure expecting longer-term backwardation, and ETFs with exposures to the equity of miners. We continue to expect copper prices to average $5/lb on the COMEX this year, and $6/lb in 2023. Feature The World Trade Organization (WTO) released a sharply lower expectation for global growth this week – from a robust 5.7% rate in 2021 to 2.8% this year and 3.2% next year.1 This effectively translates into a global recession arriving this year. The WTO forecast also calls for global merchandise trade volume to grow 3.0% in 2022 and 3.4% in 2023, which also will dampen cyclical aluminium demand. Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyCopper Will Grind Higher The WTO's forecast is one of the first among major agencies to incorporate the impact of the Ukraine war and supply-chain disruptions arising from lockdowns in Shanghai. If the WTO's forecast is realized, cyclical copper and base metals demand will slow, but markets will remain physically short – i.e., in deficit – and well bid, in our view (Chart 1). Incremental demand from the global renewable-energy and defense buildouts in the Big 3 military-industrial blocs – the EU, US and China – will gather strength and keep metals markets tight over the course of this decade (Chart 2). Chart 1Copper Will Remain Tight Even In Recession Chart 2Copper Inventories Will Remain Tight Global refined copper demand is highly sensitive to GDP growth: While not exactly a 1-for-1 correspondence, a 1% increase in global GDP translates into a 0.76% increase in refined copper demand. A 1% increase in EM GDP translates into a 0.54% increase in refined copper demand in these economies (Chart 3). Interestingly, our modeling finds DM GDP growth has had little if any effect on global refined copper demand, most likely because, historically, DM economies were not building infrastructure to the extent EM economies, particularly China and the Asian Tigers, has been building over past decades. Chart 3World, EM GDP Drive Copper Demand Estimating New Incremental Copper Demand The DM base metals demand profile – particularly for copper – is set to change dramatically following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russian aggression prompted the EU to double-down on its renewable energy build-out, and to restore a credible military to protect its borders and the safety of its citizens. Both of these efforts will be funded by new bond-issuance programs from the EU. Practically, this means the EU will join the US and Chinese military-industrial complexes in the global competition for critical materials required for the renewable-energy and defense buildouts. The EU and China already were active on the renewables side; it is the US that will be joining that race on a larger scale following the passage of legislation by the Biden administration to fund and incentivize renewables.2 The US and China have been in an intense competition to build military capacities; now the EU joins that race. None of these military-industrial complexes will provide actual spending estimates for these buildouts, which means markets have to continually revise their supply-demand estimates for base metals as data becomes available. Copper markets provide the best data for such an exercise – it is the bellwether market for base metals, with useful data to estimate supply and demand. As a starting point for our estimation of copper balances going forward, we assume global cyclical demand will remain a function of global GDP; EM demand also can be modelled using EM GDP as an explanatory variable. We also assume that the 10 years ending in 2030 will require refined copper production to double in order to meet demand for renewable-energy and from the military-industrial complex globally. We make some reasonable first approximations of what this will look like initially, and then will iterate as actual data becomes available. Chart 1 shows the evolution we expect for global consumption as a function of cyclical and incremental demand. On the supply side, we use estimated annual production for refined copper production from the Australian government's Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources, and the World Bureau of Metals Statistics. We note there are a few noteworthy projects due to come on line – e.g., Canada (Kena Gold-Copper project; Blue Cove Copper Project); Congo (Kamoa-Kakula project ramping up); Peru (Quellaveco) and Chile (Pampa Norte). We again note that copper supply in critically important states accounting for huge shares of global production – e.g., Chile (30% of global mining output) and Peru (10%) – increasingly is vulnerable to local political risks.3 Chile, in particular, is facing environmental and political challenges on the mining side: It is in the 13th year of a drought, which forced the government to institute water rationing in the capital Santiago this week. In addition, last week the federal government sued major mining companies over water-rights disputes. Our price view will evolve as we get data on cyclical and incremental demand, and supply additions.We would note in this regard major miners already are sounding the alarm on how difficult it will be to lift supply over the next 10 years given the likely demand markets will be pricing in. For now, we are maintaining our expectation COMEX copper prices will average $5/lb this year and $6/lb next year, and that markets will remain backwardated with inventories remaining under pressure (Chart 2).4 Investment Implications Base metals markets – copper included – are facing a moment of reckoning in terms of being able to support the global push for renewable energy. While the odds of a global recession in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and China's lockdowns to address the COVID-19 outbreak in Shanghai are higher – which ordinarily would point to inventory accumulation, all else equal – we believe markets will remain tight. A recession will cause cyclical demand to soften, which, along with marginal new supply, will keep the COMEX forward curve relatively flat over the short term (3-9 months). However, over the next two years and beyond, supply will not be coming on fast enough to offset cyclical and incremental demand from the global renewables and defense buildouts (Chart 3). This will keep copper markets in physical-deficit conditions, and inventories will have to draw to meet demand (Chart 4). We expect this will translate into renewed backwardation in the COMEX forward curve. Chart 4Global Inventories Will Continue To Draw Chart 5Backwardation Will Re-emerge We remain bullish copper over the medium and longer terms, and remain long commodity index exposure expecting a return of backwardation in COMEX copper, and the XME ETF, which gives us exposure to base metals miners (Chart 5).   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com   Commodity Round-Up Energy: Bullish US LNG exports hit record highs again in March, continuing a streak that began in December 2021. Exports averaged 11.9 Bcf/d for the month, on the back of new liquefaction capacity coming on line at the beginning of March. The US EIA is expecting LNG exports to average 12.2 Bcf/d this year, which would represent a 25% increase in shipments abroad. This US is accounting for the bulk of European LNG exports at present. European storage ended March at 26% of capacity, vs. a five-year average capacity of 34% at end-March. Separately, China became the largest importer of LNG in the world in 2021, displacing Japan for the top spot. According to the EIA, China’s LNG imports averaged 10.5 Bcf/d last year, which was close to 20% above 2020 levels. China's LNG imports exceeded Japan's , a 1.7 Bcf/d (19%) increase over its 2020 average, and 0.8 Bcf/d more than Japan’s imports. Base Metals: Bullish The Fraser Institute released a report assessing states’ and countries’ mining investment attractiveness for 2021. Investment attractiveness is measured by accounting for the mineral availability in the region and the effect of government policy on exploration investment. Western Australia topped the charts, while the copper-rich nations of Chile and Peru ranked 38th and 49th. This is telling of the policy adversity and uncertainty towards mining in these two countries and resonates with a BHP executive’s remarks a few weeks ago. Last week, the Chilean government sued mines operated by BHP, Albemarle, and Antofagasta over alleged environmental damage. One of the mines sued is BHP’s Escondida, the world’s largest copper mine. Precious Metals: Bullish According to Impala Platinum, palladium and rhodium prices are expected to rally for the next four-to-five years on tight market fundamentals. Low palladium supply coupled with an increase in the metal’s demand for catalytic converters, as pollution control regulations tighten, are causing the supply squeeze. On April 8 London’s Platinum and Palladium Market suspended Russian refiners from minting platinum and palladium for the London market, boosting the price of both metals (Charts 6 and 7). Russia supplies 10% and 40% of global mined platinum and palladium respectively. Depending on the period of the suspension, Europe may need to substitute Russian imports of the metals from South Africa. Chart 6 Chart 7       Footnotes   1     Please see the WTO's "TRADE STATISTICS AND OUTLOOK: Russia-Ukraine conflict puts fragile global trade recovery at risk," released by the WTO on April 12, 2022. Revisions are subject to the evolution of the war in Ukraine following Russia's invasion in February 2022. 2     Worthwhile noting here the Biden Administration in the US invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA) to "to support the production and processing of minerals and materials used for large capacity batteries – such as lithium, nickel, cobalt, graphite, and manganese." In addition, the US Department of Defense will be tasked in implementing this authority. Lastly, the White House readout notes, "The President is also reviewing potential further uses of DPA – in addition to minerals and materials – to secure safer, cleaner, and more resilient energy for America." Practically, the US and China are treating access to critical materials as a defense issue. The EU likely joins this club in the very near future. 3    Please see our report from February 24, 2022 entitled Copper Will Grind Higher for additional discussion. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 4    Please see, e.g., Bigger investment in mining needed to meet climate goals, says LGIM, published by ft.com on  April 5, 2022. The article summarizes a study done by Legal & General Investment and BHP, which notes that without a significant increase in mining activity – which is itself a hydrocarbon-intensive undertaking – there will not be sufficient supplies to achieve the IEA's 2050 net-zero goals.     Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2021  

Executive Summary Macron Still Favored, But Le Pen Cannot Be Ruled Out Macron is still favored to win the French election but Le Pen’s odds are 45%. Le Pen would halt France’s neoliberal structural reforms, paralyze EU policymaking, and help Russia’s leverage in Ukraine. But she would lack legislative support and would not fatally wound the EU or NATO. European political risk will remain high in Germany, Italy, and Spain. Favor UK equities on a relative basis. Financial markets are complacent about Russian geopolitical risk again. Steer clear of eastern European assets. Do not bottom feed in Chinese stocks. China faces social unrest. North Korean geopolitical risk is back. Australia’s election is an opportunity, not a risk. Stay bullish on Latin America. Prefer Brazil over India. Stay negative on Turkey and Pakistan.   Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return TACTICALLY LONG US 10-YEAR TREASURY 2022-04-14   Bottom Line: Go long the US 10-year Treasury on geopolitical risk and near-term peak in inflation. Feature Last year we declared that European political risk had reached a bottom and had nowhere to go but up. Great power rivalry with Russia primarily drove this view but we also argued that our structural theme of populism and nationalism would feed into it. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyThe Geopolitical Consequences Of The Ukraine War In other words, the triumph of the center-left political establishment in the aftermath of Covid-19 would be temporary. The narrow French presidential race highlights this trend. President Emmanuel Macron is still favored but Marine Le Pen, his far-right, anti-establishment opponent, could pull off an upset victory on April 24. The one thing investors can be sure of is that France’s ability to pursue neoliberal structural reforms will be limited even if Macron wins, since he will lack the mandate he received in 2017. Our GeoRisk Indicators this month suggest that global political trends are feeding into today’s stagflationary macroeconomic context. Market Complacent About Russia Again Global financial markets are becoming complacent about European security once again. Markets have begun to price a slightly lower geopolitical risk for Russia after it withdrew military forces from around Kyiv in an open admission that it failed to overthrow the government. However, western sanctions are rising, not falling, and Russia’s retreat from Kyiv means it will need to be more aggressive in the south and east (Chart 1). Chart 1Russia: GeoRisk Indicator Russia has not achieved its core aim of a militarily neutral Ukraine – so it will escalate the military effort to achieve its aim. Any military failure in the east and south would humiliate the Putin regime and make it more unpredictable and dangerous. The West has doubled down on providing Ukraine with arms and hitting Russia with sanctions (e.g. imposing a ban on Russian coal). Germany prevented an overnight ban on Russian oil and natural gas imports but the EU is diversifying away from Russian energy rapidly. Sanctions that eat away at Russia’s export revenues will force it to take a more aggressive posture now, to achieve a favorable ceasefire before funding runs out. Sweden and Finland are reviewing whether to join NATO, with recommendations due by June. Russia will rattle sabers to underscore its red line against NATO enlargement and will continue to threaten “serious military-political repercussions” if these states try to join. We would guess they would remain neutral as a decision to join NATO could lead to a larger war. Bottom Line: Global equities will remain volatile due to a second phase of the war and potential Russian threats against Ukraine’s backers. European equities and currency, especially in emerging Europe, will suffer a persistent risk premium until a ceasefire is concluded. What If Le Pen Wins In France? By contrast with the war in Ukraine, the French election is a short-term source of political risk. A surprise Le Pen victory would shake up the European political establishment but investors should bear in mind that it would not revolutionize the continent or the world, as Le Pen’s powers would be limited. Unlike President Trump in 2017, she would not take office with her party gaining full control of the legislature. Le Pen rallied into the first round of the election on April 10, garnering 23% of the vote, up from 21% in 2017. This is not a huge increase in support but her odds of winning this time are much better than in 2017 because the country has suffered a series of material shocks to its stability. Voters are less enthusiastic about President Macron and his centrist political platform. Macron, the favorite of the political establishment, received 28% of the first-round vote, up from 24% in 2017. Thus he cannot be said to have disappointed expectations, though he is vulnerable. The euro remains weak against the dollar and unlikely to rally until Russian geopolitical risk and French political risk are decided. The market is not fully pricing French risk as things stand (Chart 2). Chart 2France: GeoRisk Indicator The first-round election results show mixed trends. The political establishment suffered but so did the right-wing parties (Table 1). The main explanation is that left-wing, anti-establishment candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon beat expectations while the center-right Republicans collapsed. Macron is leading Le Pen by only five percentage points in the second-round opinion polling as we go to press (Chart 3). Macron has maintained this gap throughout the race so far and both candidates are very well known to voters. But Le Pen demonstrated significant momentum in the first round and momentum should never be underestimated. Table 1Results Of France’s First-Round Election​​​​​​ Chart 3French Election: Macron Maintains Lead​​​​​​ Are the polls accurate? Anti-establishment candidates outperformed their polling by 7 percentage points in the first round. Macron, the right-wing candidates, and the pro-establishment candidates all underperformed their March and April polls (Chart 4). Hence investors should expect polls to underrate Le Pen in the second round. Chart 4French Polls Fairly Accurate Versus First-Round Results Given the above points, it is critical to determine which candidate will gather the most support from voters whose first preference got knocked out in the first round. The strength of anti-establishment feeling means that the incumbent is vulnerable while ideological camps may not be as predictable as usual. Mélenchon has asked his voters not to give a single vote to Le Pen but he has not endorsed Macron. About 21% of his supporters say they will vote for Le Pen. Only a little more of them said they would vote for Macron, at 27% (Chart 5). Chart 5To Whom Will Voters Drift? Diagram 1, courtesy of our European Investment Strategy, illustrates that Macron is favored in both scenarios but Le Pen comes within striking distance under certain conservative assumptions about vote switching. Diagram 1Extrapolating France’s First-Round Election To The Second Round Macron’s approval rating has improved since the pandemic. This is unlike the situation in other liberal democracies (Chart 6). Chart 6Macron Handled Pandemic Reasonably Well The pandemic is fading and the economy reviving. Unemployment has fallen from 8.9% to 7.4% over the course of the pandemic. Real wage growth, at 5.8%, is higher than the 3.3% that prevailed when Macron took office in 2017 (Chart 7). Chart 7Real Wages A Boon For Macron But these positives do not rule out a Le Pen surprise. The nation has suffered not one but a series of historic shocks – the pandemic, inflation, and the war in Ukraine. Inflation is rising at 5.1%, pushing the “Misery Index” (inflation plus unemployment) to 12%, higher than when Macron took office, even if lower than the EU average (Chart 8). Chart 8Misery Index The Key Threat To Macron   Le Pen has moderated her populist message and rebranded her party in recent years to better align with the median French voter. She claims that she will not pursue a withdrawal from the European Union or the Euro Area currency union. This puts her on the right side of the one issue that disqualified her from the presidency in the past. Yet French trust in the EU is declining markedly, which suggests that Le Pen is in step with the median voter on wanting greater French autonomy (Chart 9). Le Pen’s well-known sympathy toward Vladimir Putin and Russia is a liability in the context of Russian aggression in Ukraine. Only 35% of French people had a positive opinion of Russia back in 2019, whereas 50% had a favorable view of NATO, and the gap has likely grown as a result of the invasion (Chart 10). However, the historic bout of inflation suggests that economic policy could be the most salient issue for voters rather than foreign policy. Chart 9Le Pen Only Electable Because She Accepted Europe​​​​​ Chart 10Le Pen’s NATO Stance Not Disqualifying ​​​​​ Le Pen’s economic platform is fiscally liberal and protectionist, which will appeal to voters upset over the rising cost of living and pressures of globalization. She wants to cut the income tax and value-added tax, while reversing Macron’s attempt at raising the retirement age and reforming the pension system. France’s tax rates on income, and on gasoline and diesel, are higher than the OECD average. In other words, Macron is running on painful structural reform while Le Pen is running on fiscal largesse. This is another reason to take seriously the risk of a Le Pen victory. What should investors expect if Le Pen pulls off an upset? France’s attempt at neoliberal structural reforms would grind to a halt. While Le Pen may not be able to pass domestic legislation, she would be able to halt the implementation of Macron’s reforms. Productivity and the fiscal outlook would suffer. Le Pen’s ability to change domestic policy will be limited by the National Assembly, which is due for elections from June 12-19. Her party, the National Rally (formerly the Front National), has never won more than 20% of local elections and performed poorly in the 2017 legislative vote. Investors should wait to see the results of the legislative election before drawing any conclusions about Le Pen’s ability to change domestic policy. France’s foreign policy would diverge from Europe’s. If Le Pen takes the presidency, she will put France at odds with Brussels, Berlin, and Washington, in much the same way that President Trump did. She would paralyze European policymaking. Yet Le Pen alone cannot take France out of the EU. The French public’s negative view of the EU is not the same as a majority desire to leave the bloc – and support for the euro currency stands at 69%. Le Pen does not have the support for “Frexit,” French exit from the EU. Moreover European states face immense pressures to work together in the context of global Great Power Rivalry. Independently they are small compared to the US, Russia, and China. Hence the EU will continue to consolidate as a geopolitical entity over the long run. Russia, however, would benefit from Le Pen’s presidency in the context of Ukraine ceasefire talks. EU sanctions efforts would freeze in place. Le Pen could try to take France out of NATO, though she would face extreme opposition from the military and political establishment. If she succeeded on her own executive authority, the result would be a division among NATO’s ranks in the face of Russia. This cannot be ruled out: if the US and Russia are fighting a new Cold War, then it is not unfathomable that France would revert to its Cold War posture of strategic independence. However, while France withdrew from NATO’s integrated military command from 1966-2009, it never withdrew fully from the alliance and was always still implicated in mutual defense. In today’s context, NATO’s deterrent capability would not be much diminished but Le Pen’s administration would be isolated. Russia would be unable to give any material support to France’s economy or national defense. Bottom Line: Macron is still favored for re-election but investors should upgrade Le Pen’s chances to a subjective 45%. If she wins, the euro will suffer a temporary pullback and French government bond spreads will widen over German bunds. The medium-term view on French equities and bonds will depend on her political capability, which depends on the outcome of the legislative election from June 12-19. She will likely be stymied at home and only capable of tinkering with foreign policy. But if she has legislative support, her agenda is fiscally stimulative and would produce a short-term sugar high for French corporate earnings. However, it would be negative for long-term productivity. UK, Italy, Spain: Who Else Faces Populism? Chart 11Rest Of Europe: GeoRisk Indicators Between Russian geopolitical risk and French political risk, other European countries are likely to see their own geopolitical risk premium rise (Chart 11). But these countries have their own domestic political dynamics that contribute to the reemergence of European political risk. Germany’s domestic political risk is relatively low but it faces continued geopolitical risk in the form of Russia tensions, China’s faltering economy, and potentially French populism (Chart 11, top panel). In Italy, the national unity coalition that took shape under Prime Minister Mario Draghi was an expedient undertaken in the face of the pandemic. As the pandemic fades, a backlash will take shape among the large group of voters who oppose the EU and Italian political establishment. The Italian establishment has distributed the EU recovery funds and secured the Italian presidency as a check on future populist governments. But it may not be able to do more than that before the next general election in June 2023, which means that populism will reemerge and increase the political risk premium in Italian assets going forward (Chart 11, second panel). Spain is still a “divided nation” susceptible to a rise in political risk ahead of the general election due by December 10, 2023. However, the conservative People’s Party, the chief opposition party, has suffered from renewed infighting, which gives temporary relief to the ruling Socialist Worker’s Party of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez. The Russia-Ukraine issue caused some minor divisions within the government but they are not yet leading to any major political crisis, as nationwide pro-Ukraine sentiment is largely unified. The Andalusia regional election, which is expected this November, will be a check point for the People’s Party’s new leadership and a test run for next year’s general election. Andalusia is the most populous autonomous community in Spain, consisting about 17% of the seats in the congress (the lower house). The risk for Sanchez and the Socialists is that the opposition has a strong popular base and this fact combined with the stagflationary backdrop will keep political polarization high and undermine the government’s staying power (Chart 11, third panel). While Prime Minister Boris Johnson has survived the scandal over attending social events during Covid lockdowns, as we expected, nevertheless the Labour Party is starting to make a comeback that will gain momentum ahead of the 2024 general election. Labour is unlikely to embrace fiscal austerity or attempt to reverse Brexit anytime soon. Hence the UK’s inflationary backdrop will persist (Chart 11, fourth panel). Bottom Line: European political risk has bottomed and will rise in the coming months and years, although the EU and Eurozone will survive. We still favor UK equities over developed market equities (excluding the US) because they are heavily tilted toward consumer staples and energy sectors. Stay long GBP-CZK. Favor European defense stocks over tech. Prefer Spanish stocks over Italian. China: Social Unrest More Likely China’s historic confluence of internal and external risks continues – and hence it is too soon for global investors to try to bottom-feed on Chinese investable equities (Chart 12). A tactical opportunity might emerge for non-US investors in 2023 but now is not the right time to buy. Chart 12China: GeoRisk Indicator In domestic politics, the reversion to autocracy under Xi is exacerbating the economic slowdown. True, Beijing is stimulating the economy by means of its traditional monetary and fiscal tools. The latest data show that the total social financing impulse is reviving, primarily on the back of local government bonds (Chart 13). Yet overall social financing is weaker because private sector sentiment remains downbeat. The government is pursuing excessively stringent social restrictions in the face of the pandemic. Beijing is doubling down on “Covid Zero” policy by locking down massive cities such as Shanghai. The restrictions will fail to prevent the virus from spreading. They are likely to engender social unrest, which we flagged as our top “Black Swan” risk this year and is looking more likely. Lockdowns will also obstruct production and global supply chains, pushing up global goods inflation. Meanwhile the property sector continues to slump on the back of weak domestic demand, large debt levels, excess capacity, regulatory scrutiny, and negative sentiment. Consumer borrowing appetite and general animal spirits are weak in the face of the pandemic and repressive political environment (Chart 14). Chart 13China's Stimulus Has Clearly Arrived​​​​​​ Chart 14Yet Chinese Animal Spirits Still Suffering​​​​​​ Hence China will be exporting slow growth and inflation – stagflation – to the rest of the world until after the party congress. At that point President Xi will feel politically secure enough to “let 100 flowers bloom” and try to improve economic sentiment at home and abroad. This will be a temporary phenomenon (as were the original 100 flowers under Chairman Mao) but it will be notable for 2023. In foreign politics, Russia’s attack on Ukraine has accelerated the process of Russo-Chinese alliance formation. This partnership will hasten US containment strategy toward China and impose a much faster economic transition on China as it pursues self-sufficiency. The result will be a revival of US-China tensions. The implications are negative for the rest of Asia Pacific: Taiwanese geopolitical risk will continue rising for reasons we have outlined in previous reports. In addition, Taiwanese equities are finally starting to fall off from the pandemic-induced semiconductor rally (Chart 15). The US and others are also pursuing semiconductor supply security, which will reduce Taiwan’s comparative advantage. Chart 15Taiwan: GeoRisk Indicator South Korea faces paralysis and rising tensions with North Korea. The presidential election on May 9 brought the conservatives back into the Blue House. The conservative People Power Party’s candidate, Yoon Suk-yeol, eked out a narrow victory that leaves him without much political capital. His hands are also tied by the National Assembly, at least for the next two years. He will attempt to reorient South Korean foreign policy toward the US alliance and away from China. He will walk away from the “Moonshine” policy of engagement with North Korea, which yielded no fruit over the past five years. North Korea has responded by threatening a nuclear missile test, restarting intercontinental ballistic missile tests for the first time since 2017, and adopting a more aggressive nuclear deterrence policy in which any South Korean attack will ostensibly be punished by a massive nuclear strike. Tensions on the peninsula are set to rise (Chart 16). Three US aircraft carrier groups are around Japan today, despite the war in Europe (where two are placed), suggesting high threat levels. Chart 16South Korea: GeoRisk Indicator Australia’s elections present opportunity rather than risk. Prime Minister Scott Morrison formally scheduled them for May 21. The Australian Labor Party is leading in public opinion and will perform well. The election threatens a change of parties but not a drastic change in national policy – populist parties are weak. No major improvement in China relations should be expected. Any temporary improvement, as with the Biden administration, will be subject to reversal due to China’s long-term challenge to the liberal international order. Cyclically the Australian dollar and equities stand to benefit from the global commodity upcycle as well as relative geopolitical security due to American security guarantees (Chart 17). Chart 17Australia: GeoRisk Indicator Bottom Line: China’s reversion to autocracy will keep global sentiment negative on Chinese equities until 2023 at earliest. Stay short the renminbi and Taiwanese dollar. Favor the Japanese yen over the Korean won. Favor South Korean over Taiwanese equities. Look favorably on the Australian dollar. Turkey, South Africa, And … Canada Turkish geopolitical risk will remain elevated in the context of a rampant Russia, NATO’s revival and tensions with Russia, the threat of commerce destruction and accidents in the Black Sea region, domestic economic mismanagement, foreign military adventures, and the threat posed to the aging Erdogan regime by the political opposition in the wake of the pandemic and the lead-up to the 2023 elections (Chart 18). Chart 18Turkey: GeoRisk Indicator While we are tactically bullish on South African equities and currency, we expect South African political risk to rise steadily into the 2024 general election. Almost a year has passed since the civil unrest episode of 2021. Covid-19 lockdowns have been lifted and the national state of disaster has ended, which has helped quell social tensions. This is evident in the decline of our South Africa GeoRisk indicator from 2021 highs (Chart 19). While fiscal austerity is under way in South Africa, we have argued that fiscal policy will reverse course in time for the 2024 election. In this year’s fiscal budget, the budget deficit is projected to narrow from -6% to -4.2% over the next two years. Government has increased tax revenue collection through structural reforms that are rooting out corruption and wasteful expenditure. But the ANC will have to tap into government spending to shore up lost support come 2024. Thus South Africa benefits tactically from commodity prices but cyclically the currency is vulnerable. Chart 19South Africa: GeoRisk Indicator Canadian political risk will rise but that should not deter investors from favoring Canadian assets that are not exposed to the property bubble. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has had a net negative approval rating since early 2021 and his government is losing political capital due to inflation, social unrest, and rising difficulties with housing affordability (Chart 20). While he does not face an election until 2025, the Conservative Party is developing more effective messaging. Chart 20Canada: GeoRisk Indicator India Will Stay Neutral But Lean Toward The West Chart 21Sino-Pak Alliance’s Geopolitical Power Is Thrice That Of India US President Joe Biden has openly expressed his administration’s displeasure regarding India’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This has led many to question the strength of Indo-US relations and the direction of India’s geopolitical alignments. To complicate matters, China’s overtures towards India have turned positive lately, leading clients to ask if a realignment in Indo-China relations is nigh. To accurately assess India’s long-term geopolitical propensities, it is important to draw a distinction between ‘cyclical’ and ‘structural’ dynamics that are at play today. Such a distinction yields crystal-clear answers about India’s strategic geopolitical leanings. In specific: Indo-US Relations Will Strengthen On A Strategic Horizon: As the US’s and China’s grand strategies collide, minor and major geopolitical earthquakes are bound to take place in South Asia and the Indo-Pacific. Against this backdrop, India will strategically align with the US to strengthen its hand in the region (Chart 21). While the Russo-Ukrainian war is a major global geopolitical event, for India this is a side-show at best. True, India will retain aspects of its historic good relations with Russia. Yet countering China’s encirclement of India is a far more fundamental concern for India. Since Russia has broken with Europe, and China cannot reject Russia’s alliance, India will gradually align with the US and its allies. India And China Will End Up As A Conflicting Dyad: Strategic conflict between the two Asian powers is likely because China’s naval development and its Eurasian strategy threaten India’s national security and geopolitical imperatives, while India’s alliances are adding to China’s distrust of India. Thus any improvement in Sino-Indian diplomatic relations will be short-lived. The US will constantly provide leeway for India in its attempts to court India as a key player in the containment strategy against China. The US and its allies are the premier maritime powers and upholders of the liberal world order – India serves its national interest better by joining them rather than joining China in a risky attempt to confront the US navy and revolutionize the world order. Indo-Russian Relations Are Bound To Fade In The Long Run: India will lean towards the US over the next few years for reasons of security and economics. But India’s movement into America’s sphere of influence will be slow – and that is by design. India is testing waters with America through networks like the Quadrilateral Dialogue. It sees its historic relationship with Russia as a matter of necessity in the short run and a useful diversification strategy in the long run. True, India will maintain a trading relationship with Russia for defense goods and cheap oil. But this trade will be transactional and is not reason enough for India to join Russia and China in opposing US global leadership. While these factors will mean that Indo-Russian relations are amicable over a cyclical horizon, this relationship is bound to fade over a strategic horizon as China and Russia grow closer and the US pursues its grand strategy of countering China and Russia. Bottom Line: India may appear to be neutral about the Russo-Ukrainian war but India will shed its historical stance of neutrality and veer towards America’s sphere of influence on a strategic timeframe. India is fully aware of its strategic importance to both the American camp and the Russo-Chinese camp. It thus has the luxury of making its leanings explicit after extracting most from both sides. Long Brazil / Short India Brazil’s equity markets have been on a tear. MSCI Brazil has outperformed MSCI EM by 49% in 2022 YTD. Brazil’s markets have done well because Brazil is a commodity exporter and the war in Ukraine has little bearing on faraway Latin America. This rally will have legs although Brazil’s political risks will likely pick back up in advance of the election (Chart 22). The reduction in Brazil’s geopolitical risk so far this year has been driven mainly by the fact that the currency has bounced on the surge in commodity prices. In addition, former President Lula da Silva is the current favorite to win the 2022 presidential elections – Lula is a known quantity and not repugnant to global financial institutions (Chart 23). Chart 22Brazil's Markets Have Benefitted From Rising Commodity Prices Chart 23Brazil: Watch Out For Political Impact Of Commodity Prices Whilst there is no denying that the first-round effects of the Ukraine war have been positive for Brazil, there is a need to watch out for the second-round effects of the war as Latin America’s largest economy heads towards elections. Surging prices will affect two key constituencies in Brazil: consumers and farmers. Consumer price inflation in Brazil has been ascendant and adding to Brazil’s median voter’s economic miseries. Rising inflation will thus undermine President Jair Bolsonaro’s re-election prospects further. The fact that energy prices are a potent polling issue is evinced by the fact that Bolsonaro recently sacked the chief executive of Petrobras (i.e. Brazil’s largest listed company) over rising fuel costs. Furthermore, Brazil is a leading exporter of farm produce and hence also a large importer of fertilizers. Fertilizer prices have surged since the war broke out. This is problematic for Brazil since Russia and Belarus account for a lion’s share of Brazil’s fertilizer imports. Much like inflation in general, the surge in fertilizer prices will affect the elections because some of the regions that support Bolsonaro also happen to be regions whose reliance on agriculture is meaningful (Map 1). They will suffer from higher input prices. Map 1States That Supported Bolso, Could Be Affected By Fertilizer Price Surge Chart 24Long Brazil Financials / Short India Given that Bolsonaro continues to lag Lula on popularity ratings – and given the adverse effect that higher commodity prices will have on Brazil’s voters – we expect Bolsonaro to resort to fiscal populism or attacks on Brazil’s institutions in a last-ditch effort to cling to power. He could even be emboldened by the fact that Sérgio Moro, the former judge and corruption fighter, decided to pull out of the presidential race. This could provide a fillip to Bolso’s popularity. Bottom Line: Brazil currently offers a buying opportunity owing to attractive valuations and high commodity prices. But investors should stay wary of latent political risks in Brazil, which could manifest themselves as presidential elections draw closer. We urge investors to take-on only selective tactical exposure in Brazil for now. Equities appear cheap but political and macro risks abound. To play the rally yet stave off political risk, we suggest a tactical pair trade: Long Brazil Financials / Short India (Chart 24). Whilst we remain constructive on India on a strategic horizon, for the next 12 months we worry about near-term macro and geopolitical headwinds as well as India’s rich valuations. Don’t Buy Into Pakistan’s Government Change Chart 25Pakistan’s Military Is Unusually Influential The newest phase in Pakistan’s endless cycle of political instability has begun. Prime Minister Imran Khan has been ousted. A new coalition government and a new prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, have assumed power. Prime Minister Sharif’s appointment may make it appear like risks imposed by Pakistan have abated. After all, Sharif is seen as a good administrator and has signaled an interest in mending ties with India. But despite the appearance of a regime change, geopolitical risks imposed by Pakistan remain intact for three sets of reasons: Military Is Still In Charge: Pakistan’s military has been and remains the primary power center in the country (Chart 25). Former Prime Minister Khan’s rise to power was possible owing to the military’s support and he fell for the same reason. Since the military influences the civil administration as well as foreign policy, a lasting improvement in Indo-Pak relations is highly unlikely. Risk Of “Rally Round The Flag” Diversion: General elections are due in Pakistan by October 2023. Sharif is acutely aware of the stiff competition he will face at these elections. His competitors exist outside as well as inside his government. One such contender is Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), which is a key coalition partner of the new government that assumed power. Imran Khan himself is still popular and will plot to return to power. Against such a backdrop the newly elected PM is highly unlikely to pursue an improvement in Indo-Pak relations. Such a strategy will adversely affect his popularity and may also upset the military. Hence we highlight the risk of the February 2021 Indo-Pak ceasefire being violated in the run up to Pakistan’s general elections. India’s government has no reason to prevent tensions, given its own political calculations and the benefits of nationalism. Internal Social Instability Poor: Pakistan is young but the country can be likened to a social tinderbox. Many poor youths, a weak economy, and inadequate political valves to release social tensions make for an explosive combination. Pakistan remains a source of geopolitical risk for the South Asian region. Some clients have inquired as to whether the change of government in Pakistan implies closer relations with the United States. The US has less need for Pakistan now that it has withdrawn from Afghanistan. It is focused on countering Russia and China. As such the US has great need of courting India and less need of courting Pakistan. Pakistan will remain China’s ally and will struggle to retain significant US assistance. Bottom Line: We remain strategic sellers of Pakistani equities. Pakistan must contend with high internal social instability, a weak democracy, a weak economy and an unusually influential military. As long as the military remains excessively influential in Pakistan, its foreign policy stance towards India will stay hostile. Yet the military will remain influential because Pakistan exists in a permanent geopolitical competition with India. And until Pakistan’s economy improves structurally and endemically, its alliance with China will stay strong. Investment Takeaways Cyclically go long US 10-year Treasuries. Geopolitical risks are historically high and rising but complacency is returning to markets. Meanwhile inflation is nearing a cyclical peak. Favor US stocks over global. It is too soon to go long euro or European assets, especially emerging Europe. Favor UK equities over developed markets (excluding the US). Stay long GBP-CZK. Favor European defense stocks over European tech. Stay short the Chinese renminbi and Taiwanese dollar. Favor the Japanese yen over the Korean won. Favor South Korean over Taiwanese equities.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist ritika.mankar@bcaresearch.com Jesse Anak Kuri Associate Editor Jesse.Kuri@bcaresearch.com Yushu Ma Research Analyst yushu.ma@bcaresearch.com Guy Russell Senior Analyst GuyR@bcaresearch.com Alice Brocheux Research Associate alice.brocheux@bcaresearch.com   Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix Section III: Geopolitical Calendar

Executive Summary The Ukraine war reinforces our key view that commodity producers will use their geopolitical leverage this year. The market is growing complacent again about Russian risks. Iran is part of the same dynamic. If US-Iran talks fail, as we expect, the Middle East will destabilize and add another energy supply risk on top of the Russian risk. The Ukraine war also interacts with our other two key views for 2022: China’s reversion to autocracy and the US’s policy insularity. Both add policy uncertainty and weigh on risk sentiment. The war also reinforces our strategic themes for the 2020s: Great Power Rivalry, Hypo-Globalization, and Populism/Nationalism. Stagflation Cometh Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return Cyclically Long Global Defensives Versus Cyclicals 2022-01-20 10.8% Bottom Line: Tactically stay long global defensives and large caps. Cyclically stay long gold, US equities, aerospace/defense, and cyber security. Feature In our annual outlook, “The Gathering Storm,” we argued that the post-pandemic world economy would destabilize due to intensifying rivalry among the leading nations. We argued that China’s reversion to autocracy, US domestic divisions, and Russia’s commodity leverage would produce a toxic brew for global investors in 2022. By January 27 it was clear to us that Russia would invade Ukraine, so the storm was arriving sooner than we thought, and we doubled down on our defensive and risk-averse market positioning. We derived these three key views from new cyclical trends and the way they interact with our underlying strategic themes – Great Power Rivalry, Hypo-Globalization, and Populism/Nationalism (Table 1). These themes are mutually reinforcing, rooted in solid evidence over many years, and will not change easily. Table 1Three Geopolitical Strategic Themes Related Report  Geopolitical Strategy2022 Key Views: The Gathering Storm The Ukraine war reinforces them: Russia took military action to increase its security relative to the US and NATO; the West imposed sanctions that reduce globalization with Russia and potentially other states; Russian aggression stemmed from nationalism and caused a spike in global prices that will spur more nationalism and populism going forward. In this report we examine how these trends will develop in the second quarter and beyond. We see stagflation taking shape and recommend investors prepare for it by continuing to favor defensive sectors, commodities, and value plays. Checking Up On Our Russia View For 2022 Our third key view for 2022 – that oil producers like Russia and Iran possessed immense geopolitical leverage and would most likely use it – is clearly the dominant geopolitical trend of the year, as manifested in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.1 Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014 and curtailed operations after commodity prices crashed. It launched a new and larger invasion in 2022 when a new commodity cycle began (Chart 1). Facing tactical setbacks, Russia has begun withdrawing forces from around the Ukrainian capital Kyiv. But it will redouble its efforts to conquer the eastern Donbas region and the southern coastline. The coast is the most strategic territory at stake (Map 1). Chart 1Russia's Commodity-Enabled Aggression Map 1Russian Invasion Of Ukraine, 2022 The most decisive limitation on Russia’s military effort would come from a collapse of commodity exports or prices, which has not happened yet. Europe continues to buy Russian oil and natural gas, although it is debating a ban on the $4.4 billion worth of coal that it imports. With high energy prices making up for a drop in export volumes, Russian armed forces can still attempt a summer and fall campaign (Chart 2). The aim would be to conquer remaining portions of Donetsk and Luhansk, the “land bridge” to Crimea, and potentially the stretch of land between the Dnieper river and eastern Moldova, where Russian troops are already stationed. Chart 2Russia’s War Financing Ukraine’s military neutrality is the core Russian objective. Ukraine is offering neutrality in exchange for security guarantees in the current ceasefire talks. Hence a durable ceasefire is possible if the details of neutrality are agreed – Ukraine forswears joining NATO and hosting foreign military infrastructure while accepting limitations on military exercises and defense systems. The security guarantees that Ukraine demands are mostly symbolic, as the western powers that would be credible guarantors are already unwilling to use military force against Russia (e.g. the US, UK, NATO members). However, Russia’s withdrawal from Kyiv will embolden the Ukrainians, so we do not expect a durable ceasefire in the second quarter. Global investors will be mistaken if they ignore Ukraine in the second quarter, at least until core problems are resolved. What matters most is whether the war expands beyond Ukraine: The likelihood of a broader war is low but not negligible. So far the Russian regime is behaving somewhat rationally: Moscow attacked a non-NATO member to prevent it from joining NATO; it limited the size of the military commitment; and it is now accepting reality and withdrawing from Kyiv while negotiating on Ukrainian neutrality. But a major problem emerges if Russia’s military fails in the Donbas while Ukraine reneges on offers of neutrality. Any ceasefire could fall apart and the war could re-escalate. Russia could redouble its attacks on the country or conduct a limited attack outside of Ukraine to trigger a crisis in the western alliance. Moreover, if sanctions keep rising until Russia’s economy collapses, Moscow could become less rational. Finland and Sweden have seen a shift of public opinion in favor of joining NATO. Any intention to do so would trigger a belligerent reaction from Russia. These governments are well aware of the precarious balance that must be maintained to prevent war, so war is unlikely. But if their stance changes then Russia will threaten to attack. Russia would threaten to bomb these states since it cannot now credibly threaten invasion by land (Charts 3A & 3B). Chart 3ANordic States Joining NATO Would Trigger Larger War​​​​​ Chart 3BNordic States Joining NATO Would Trigger Larger War​​​​​​ The Black Sea is vulnerable to “Black Swan” events or military spillovers. Russia is re-concentrating its military efforts in the Donbas and land bridge to Crimea. Russia could expand its offensive to Odessa and the Moldovan border. Or Russia could attempt to create a new norm of naval dominance in the Black Sea. Or ships from third countries could hit mines or become casualties of war. For these and other reasons, investors should not take on additional risk in their portfolios on the basis that a durable ceasefire will be concluded quickly. Russia’s position is far too vulnerable to encourage risk-taking. Moscow could escalate tensions to try to save face. It is also critical to ensure that Russia and Europe maintain their energy trade: Neither side has an interest in total energy cutoff. Russia needs the revenue to finance its war and needs to discourage Europe from fulfilling its pledges to transition rapidly to other sources and substitutes. Europe needs the energy to avoid recession, maintain some tie with Russia, and enable its energy diversification strategy. So far natural gas flows are continuing (Chart 4). Chart 4Natural Gas Flows Continuing (So Far)​​​​​​ Chart 5Global Oil Supply/Demand Balance​​​​​​ However, risks to energy trade are rising. Russia is threatening to cut off energy exports if not paid in rubles, while the EU is beginning to entertain sanctions on energy. Russia can reduce oil or gas flows incrementally to keep prices high and prevent Europe from rebuilding stockpiles for fall and winter. Partial energy cutoff is possible. Europe’s diversification makes Russia’s predicament dire. Substantial sanction relief is highly unlikely, as western powers will want to prevent Russia from rebuilding its economy and military. Russia could try to impose significant pain on Europe to try to force a more favorable diplomatic solution. A third factor that matters is whether the US will expand its sanction enforcement to demand strict compliance from other nations, at pain of secondary sanctions: Secondary sanctions are likely in the case of China and other nations that stand at odds with the US and help Russia circumvent sanctions. In China’s case, the US is already interested in imposing sanctions on the financial or technology sector as part of its long-term containment strategy. While the Biden administration’s preference is to control the pace of escalation with China, and thus not to slap sanctions immediately, nevertheless substantial sanctions cannot be ruled out in the second quarter. Secondary sanctions will be limited in the case of US allies and partners, such as EU members, Turkey, and India. Countries that do business with Russia but are critical to US strategy will be given waivers or special treatment. Russia is not the only commodity producer that enjoys outsized geopolitical leverage amid a global commodity squeeze. Iran is the next most critical producer. Iran is also critical for the stability of the Middle East. In particular, the consequential US-Iran talks over whether to rejoin the 2015 nuclear deal are likely to come to a decision in the second quarter. Chart 6Failure Of US-Iran Talks Jeopardizes Middle East Oil Supply If the US and Iran agree to a strategic détente, then regional tensions will briefly subside, reducing global oil disruption risks and supply pressures. Iran could bring 1.3 million barrels per day of oil back online, adding to President Biden’s 1 million per day release of strategic petroleum reserves. The combination would amount to 2.3% of global demand and more than cover the projected quarterly average supply deficit, which ranges from 400k to 900k barrels per day for the rest of 2022 (Chart 5). If the US and Iran fail to agree, then the Middle East will suffer another round of instability, adding a Middle Eastern energy shock on top of the Russian shock. Not only would Iran’s 1.3 million barrels per day be jeopardized but so would Iraq’s 4.4 million, Saudi Arabia’s 10.3 million, the UAE’s 3.0 million, or the Strait of Hormuz’s combined 24 million per day (Chart 6). This gives Iran leverage to pursue nuclear weaponization prior to any change in US government that would strengthen Israel’s ability to stop Iran. We would not bet on an agreement – but we cannot rule it out. The Biden administration can reduce sanctions via executive action to prevent a greater oil shock, while the Iranians can accept sanction relief in exchange for easily reversible moves toward compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal. But this would be a short-term, stop-gap measure, not a long-term strategic détente. Conflict between Iran and its neighbors will revive sooner than expected after the deal is agreed, as Iran’s nuclear ambitions will persist. OPEC states are already producing more oil rapidly, suggesting no quick fix if the US-Iran deal falls apart. While core OPEC states have 3.5 million barrels per day in spare capacity to bring to bear, a serious escalation of tensions with Iran would jeopardize this solution. Finally, if commodity producers have geopolitical leverage, then commodity consumers are lacking in leverage. This is clear from Europe’s inability to prevent Russia’s attack or ban Russian energy. It is clear from the US’s apparent unwillingness to give up on a short-term deal with Iran. It is clear from China’s inability to provide sufficient monetary and fiscal stimulus as it struggles with Covid-19. Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan are geopolitically significant importers of Russian and Ukrainian grain that are likely to face food insecurity and social unrest. We will address this issue below under our Populism/Nationalism theme. Bottom Line: Investors should not be complacent. Russia’s military standing in Ukraine is weak, but its ability to finance the war has not yet collapsed, which means that it will escalate the conflict to save face. What About Our Other Key Views For 2022? Our other two key views for 2022 are even more relevant in the wake of the Ukraine re-invasion. China’s reversion to autocracy is a factor in China’s domestic and foreign policy: Domestically China needs economic and social stability in the advance of the twentieth national party congress, when President Xi Jinping hopes to clinch 10 more years in power. In pursuit of this goal China is easing monetary and fiscal policy. However, with depressed animal spirits, a weakening property sector, and high debt levels, monetary policy is proving insufficient. Fiscal policy will have to step up. But even here, inflation is likely to impose a limitation on how much stimulus the authorities can utilize (Chart 7). Chart 7China Stimulus Impaired By Inflation​​​​​​ Chart 8Chinese Supply Kinks To Persist Due To Covid-19 China is also trying but failing to maintain a “Covid Zero” policy. The more contagious Omicron variant of the virus is breaking out and slipping beyond the authorities’ ability to suppress cases of the virus to zero. Shanghai is on lockdown and other cities will follow suit. China will attempt to redouble its containment efforts before it will accept the reality that the virus cannot be contained. Chinese production and shipping will become delayed and obstructed as a result, putting another round of upward pressure on global prices (Chart 8). Stringent pandemic restrictions could trigger social unrest. China is ripe for social unrest, which is why it launched the “Common Prosperity” program last year to convince citizens that quality of life will improve. But this program is a long-term program that will not bring immediate relief. On the contrary, the economy is still suffering and the virus will spread more widely, as well as draconian social restrictions. The result is that the lead up to the national party congress will not be as smooth as the Xi administration had hoped. Global investors will remain pessimistic toward Chinese stocks. In foreign affairs, China’s reversion to autocracy is reinforced by Russia’s clash with the West and the need to coordinate more closely. Xi hosted Putin in Beijing on February 4, prior to the invasion, and the two declared that their strategic partnership ushers in a “new era” of “multipolarity” and that their cooperation has “no limits,” which really means that military cooperation is not forbidden. China agreed to purchase an additional 10 billion cubic meters of Russian natural gas over 30-years. While this amount would only replace 3% of Russian natural gas exports to Europe, it would mark a 26% increase in Russian exports to China. More importantly it acts as a symbol of Chinese willingness to substitute for Europe over time. There is a long way to go for China to replace Europe as a customer (Chart 9). But China knows it needs to convert its US dollar foreign exchange reserves, vulnerable to US sanctions, into hard investments in supply security within the Eurasian continent. Chart 9Long Way To Go For China NatGas Imports To Replace EU China is helping Russia circumvent sanctions. China’s chief interest is to minimize the shock to its domestic economy. This means keeping Russian energy and commodities flowing. China could also offer military equipment for Russia. The US has expressly warned China against taking such an action. China could mitigate the blowback by stipulating that the assistance cannot be used in Ukraine. This would be unenforceable but would provide diplomatic cover. While China is uncomfortable with the disturbance of the Ukraine war – it does not want foreign affairs to cause even larger supply shocks. At the same time, China does not want Russia to lose the war or Putin’s regime to fall from power. If Russia loses, Taiwan and its western allies would be emboldened, while Russia could pursue a détente with the West, leaving China isolated. Since China faces US containment policy regardless of what happens in Russia, it is better for China to have Putin making an example out of Ukraine and keeping the Americans and Europeans preoccupied. Chart 10China Strives To Preserve EU Trade Ties China must also preserve ties with Europe. Diplomacy will likely succeed in the short run since Europe has no interest or desire to expand sanctions to China. The Biden administration will defer to Europe on the pace of sanctions – it is not willing or able to force Europe to break with China suddenly. Eventually Europe and China may sever relations but not yet – China has a powerful incentive to preserve them (Chart 10). China will also court India and other powers in an attempt to hedge its bets on Russia while weakening any American containment. Beyond the party congress, China will be focused on securing the economic recovery and implementing the common prosperity agenda. The first step is to maintain easy monetary and fiscal policy. The second step is to “let 100 flowers bloom,” i.e. relaxing social and regulatory controls to try to revive entrepreneurship and animal spirits, which are heavily depressed. Xi will have the ability to do this after re-consolidating power. The third step will be to try to stabilize economic relations with Europe and others (conceivably even the US temporarily, though no serious détente is likely). The remaining key view for 2022 is that the Biden administration’s domestic focus will be defensive and will invite foreign policy challenges. The Ukraine war vindicates this view but the question now is whether Biden has or will change tack: The Biden administration is focused on the midterm elections and the huge risk to the Democratic Party’s standing. Biden has not received a boost in opinion polls from the war. He is polling even worse when it comes to handling of the economy (Chart 11). While he should be able to repackage his budget reconciliation bill as an energy security bill, his thin majorities in both houses make passage difficult. Chart 11Biden And Democrats Face Shellacking In Midterm Election Biden’s weak standing – with or without a midterm shellacking – raises the prospect that Republicans could take back the White House in 2024, which discourages foreign nations from making any significant concessions to the United States in their negotiations. They must assume that partisanship will continue to contaminate foreign policy and lead to abrupt policy reversals. In foreign policy, the US remains reactive in the face of Russian aggression. If Russia signs a ceasefire, the US will not sabotage it to prolong Russian difficulties. Moreover Biden continues to exempt Europe and other allies and partners from enforcing the US’s most severe sanctions for fear of a larger energy shock. Europe’s avoidance of an energy ban is critical and any change in US policy to try to force the EU to cut off Russian energy is unlikely. China will not agree to structural reform or deep concessions in its trade negotiations, knowing that former President Trump could come back. The Biden administration’s own trade policy toward China is limited in scope, as the US Trade Representative Katherine Tai admitted when she said that the US could no longer aim to change China’s behavior via trade talks. Biden’s only proactive foreign policy initiative, Iran, will not bring him public kudos if it is achieved. But American inconstancy is one of the reasons that Iran may walk away from the 2015 nuclear deal. Why should Iran’s hawkish leaders be expected to constrain their nuclear program and expose their economy to future US sanctions if they can circumvent US sanctions anyway, and Republicans have a fair chance of coming back into power as early as January 2025? Biden’s unprecedented release of strategic petroleum reserves will not be able to prevent gasoline prices from staying high given the underlying supply pressures at home and abroad. This is especially true if the Iran talks fail as we expect. Even if inflation abates before the election, it is unlikely to abate enough to save his party from a shellacking. That in turn will weaken the global impression of his administration’s staying power. Hence Biden will focus on maintaining US alliances, which means allowing Europe, India, and others to proceed at a more pragmatic and dovish pace in their relations with Russia and China. Bottom Line: China’s reversion to autocracy and America’s policy insularity suggest that global investors face considerable policy uncertainty this year even aside from the war in Europe. Checking Up On Our Strategic Themes For The 2020s Russia’s invasion strongly confirmed our three strategic themes of Great Power Rivalry, Hypo-Globalization, and Populism/Nationalism. These themes are mutually reinforcing: insecurity among the leading nation-states encourages regionalization rather than globalization, while populism and nationalism encourage nations to pursue economic and security interests at the expense of their neighbors. First, the Ukraine war confirms and exacerbates Great Power Rivalry: Chart 12China And Russia Both Need To Balance Against US Preponderance Russia’s action vindicates the “realist” school of international relations (in which we count ourselves) by forcing the world to wake up to the fact that nations still care primarily about national security defined in material ways, such as armies, resources, and territories. The paradox of realism is that if at least one of the great nations pursues its national self-interest and engages in competition for security, then all other nations will be forced to do the same. If a nation neglects its national security interests in pursuit of global economic engagement and cooperation, then it will suffer, since other nations will take advantage of it to enhance their security. Hence, as a result of Ukraine, nations will give a higher weight to national security relative to economic efficiency. The result will be an acceleration of decisions to use fiscal funds and guide the private economy in pursuit of national interests – i.e. the Return of Big Government. Since actions to increase deterrence will provoke counteractions for the same reason, overall insecurity will rise. For example, the US and China will take extra precautions in case of future sanctions and war. But these precautions will reduce trust and cooperation and increase the probability of war over the long run. For the same reason, China cannot reject Russia’s strategic overture – it cannot afford to alienate and isolate Russia. China and Russia have a shared interest in countering the United States because it is the only nation that could conceivably impose a global empire over all nations (Chart 12). The US could deprive Beijing and Moscow of the regional spheres of influence that they each need to improve their national security. This is true not only in Ukraine and Taiwan but in other peripheral areas such as Belarus, the Caucasus, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia. China has much to gain from Russia. Russia is offering China privileged overland access to Russian, Central Asian, and Middle Eastern resources and markets. This resource base is vital to China’s strategic needs, given its import dependency and vulnerability to US maritime power (Chart 13). Chart 13China’s Maritime Vulnerability Forces Eurasian Strategy, Russian Alliance Investors should understand Great Power Rivalry in a multipolar rather than bipolar sense. As Russia breaks from the West, investors are quick to move rapidly to the bipolar Cold War analogy because that is what they are familiar with. But the world today has multiple poles of political power, as it did for centuries prior to the twentieth. While the US is the preponderant power, it is not hegemonic. It faces not one but two revisionist challengers – Russia and China. Meanwhile Europe and India are independent poles of power that are not exclusively aligned with the US or China. For example, China and the EU need to maintain economic ties with each other for the sake of stability, and neither the US nor Russia can prevent them from doing so. The same goes for India and Russia. China will embrace Russia and Europe at the same time, while hardening its economy against US punitive measures. India will preserve ties with Russia and China, while avoiding conflict with the US and its allies (the maritime powers), whom it needs for its long-term strategic security in the Indian Ocean basin. Ultimately bipolarity may be the end-game – e.g. if China takes aggressive action to revise the global order like Russia has done – but the persistence of Sino-European ties and Russo-Indian ties suggest we are not there yet. Second, the Ukraine war reinforces Hypo-Globalization: Since the pandemic we have argued that trade would revive on the global economic snapback but that globalization – the deepening of trade integration – would ultimately fall short of its pre-2020 and pre-2008 trajectory. Instead we would inhabit a new world of “hypo-globalization,” in which trade flows fell short of potential. So far the data support this view (Chart 14). Chart 14Globalization Falling Short Of Potential The Ukraine war has strengthened this thesis not only by concretely reducing Russia’s trajectory of trade with the West – reversing decades of integration since the fall of the Soviet Union – but also by increasing the need for nations to guard against a future Chinese confrontation with the Western world. Trust between China and the West will further erode. China will need to guard against any future sanctions, and thus diversify away from the US dollar and assets, while the US will need to do a better job of deterring China against aggression in Asia, and will thus have to diversify away from Chinese manufacturing and critical resources like rare earths. While China and Europe need each other now, the US and China are firmly set on a long-term path of security competition in East Asia. Eventually either the US or China will take a more aggressive stance and Europe will be forced to react. Since Europe will still need US support against a decaying and aggressive Russia, it will likely be dragged into assisting the US against China. Third, the Ukraine war reflects and amplifies Populism/Nationalism: Populism and nationalism are not the same thing but they both stem from the slowing trend of global income growth, the rise of inequality, the corruption of the elite political establishments, and now the rise in inflation. Nations have to devote more resources to pacifying an angry populace, or distracting that populace through foreign adventures, or both. The Ukraine war reflects the rise in nationalism. First, the collapse of the Soviet Union ushered in a period in which Moscow lost control of its periphery, while the diverse peoples could pursue national self-determination and statehood. The independence and success of the Baltic states depended on economic and military cooperation with the West, which eroded Russian national security and provoked a nationalist backlash in the form of President Putin’s regime. Ukraine became the epicenter of this conflict. Ukraine’s successful military resistance is likely to provoke a dangerous backlash from Moscow until either policy changes or the regime changes. American nationalism has flared repeatedly since the fall of the Soviet Union, namely in the Iraq war. The American state has suffered economically and politically for that imperial overreach. But American nationalism is still a potent force and could trigger a more aggressive shift in US foreign policy in 2024 or beyond. European states have kept nationalism in check and tried to subsume their various nationalist sentiments into a liberal and internationalist project, the European Union. The wave of nationalist forces in the wake of the European debt crisis has subsided, with the exception of the United Kingdom, where it flowered in Brexit. The French election in the second quarter will likely continue this trend with the re-election of President Emmanuel Macron, but even if he should suffer a surprise upset to nationalist Marine Le Pen, Europe’s centripetal forces will prevent her from taking France out of the EU or euro or NATO (Chart 15). Over the coming decade, nationalist forces will revive and will present a new challenge to Europe’s ruling elites – but global great power competition strongly supports the EU’s continued evolution into a single geopolitical entity, since the independent states are extremely vulnerable to Russia, China, and even the US unless they unite and strengthen their superstructure. Chart 15Macron Favored, Le Pen Would Be Ineffective In fact the true base of global nationalism is migrating to Asia. Chinese and Indian nationalism are very potent forces under President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Xi is on the verge of clinching another ten years in power while Modi is still favored for re-election in 2024, so there is no reason to anticipate a change anytime soon. The effects are various but what is most important for investors is to recognize that as China’s potential GDP has fallen over the past decade, the Communist Party has begun to utilize nationalism as a new source of legitimacy, and this is expressed through a more assertive foreign policy. President Xi is the emblem of this shift and it will not change, even if China pursues a lower profile over certain periods to avoid provoking the US and its allies into a more effective coalition to contain China. Chart 16Food Insecurity Will Promote Global Unrest, Populism The surge in global prices will destabilize regimes that lack food security and contribute to new bouts of populism and nationalism. Turkey is the most vulnerable due to a confluence of political, economic, and military risks that will unsettle the state. But Egypt is vulnerable to an Arab Spring 2.0 that would have negative security implications for Israel and add powder to the Middle Eastern powder keg. Pakistan is already witnessing political turmoil. Investors may overlook any Indonesian unrest due to its attractiveness in a world where Russia and China are scaring away western investment (Chart 16). All three of these strategic themes are mutually reinforcing – and they tend to be inflationary over the long run. Great powers that redouble the pursuit of national interest – through defense spending and energy security investments – while simultaneously being forced to expand their social safety nets to appease popular discontent, will drive up budget deficits, consume a lot of natural resources, and purchase a lot of capital equipment. They will also more frequently engage in economic or military conflicts that constrain supply (Chart 17). Chart 17War And Preparation For War Are Inflationary Bottom Line: The Ukraine war is a powerful confirmation of our three strategic themes. It is also a confirmation that these themes have inflationary macroeconomic implications. Investment Takeaways Chart 18Global Investors Still Flee To US For Safety Now that great power rivalry is intensifying immediately and rapidly, and yet China’s and Europe’s economies are encountering greater difficulties, we expect stagflation to arrive sooner rather than later. High headline and core inflation, the Ukraine war, tacit Chinese support for Russia, persistent Chinese supply kinks, US and EU sanctions, US midterm elections, and a potential US-Iran diplomatic breakdown will all weigh on risk sentiment in the second quarter. In Ukraine, Russia’s position is too weak to give comfort for investors, who should continue to favor defensive over cyclical equities and US stocks over global stocks. Russia’s break with the West, and the West’s use of sanctions to prevent Russia from accessing its foreign exchange reserves, has raised new questions about the global currency reserve system and the dollar’s status within that system. Over the coming years China will redouble the efforts it began in the wake of the Great Recession to reduce its dependency on US dollar assets within its reserve basket, while also recycling new current account surpluses into non-dollar assets. However, the evidence does not suggest that King Dollar will suffer a structural breakdown. First, the world lacks alternative safe-haven assets to US Treasuries – and net foreign purchases of US bonds rose in the face of the Ukraine war (Chart 18). Second, the return of war to Europe will weaken the perceived long-term security of European currency and government bonds relative to US counterparts. Even if the Ukraine war is contained in the short run, as we expect, Russia is in structural decline and will remain a disruptive player for some time. We are not at all bearish on the euro or European bonds but we do not see the Ukraine war as increasing their value proposition, to put it lightly. The same logic extends to Japanese bonds, since China, like Russia, is an autocratic and revisionist state that threatens to shake up the security order in its neighborhood. Japan is relatively secure as a nation and we are bullish on the yen, but China’s de facto alliance with Russia weakens Japan’s security outlook over the very long run, especially relative to the United States. Thus, on a cyclical basis the dollar can depreciate, but on a structural basis the US dollar will remain the dominant reserve currency. The US is not only the wealthiest and most secure country in the world but also the largest oil producer. Meanwhile Chinese potential growth, domestic political stability, and foreign relations are all worsening. The US-Iran talks are the most critical geopolitical dynamic in the second quarter aside from Russia’s clash with the West. The fate of the 2015 nuclear deal will be decided soon and will determine whether an even bigger energy shock begins to emanate from the Middle East. We would not bet on a new US-Iran deal but we cannot rule it out. Any deal would be a short-term, stop-gap deal but would prevent an immediate destabilization of the Middle East this year. As such it would reduce the risk of stagflation. Since we expect the deal to fail, we expect a new energy shock to emerge. We see stagflation as more likely than the BCA House View. It will be difficult to lift productivity in an environment of geopolitical and political uncertainty combined with slowing global growth, rising interest rates, and a worsening commodity shock (Chart 19). We will gladly revise this stance if Biden clinches an Iran deal, China relaxes its Covid Zero policy and stabilizes domestic demand, Russia and Europe maintain energy trade, and commodity prices fall to more sustainable levels for global demand. Chart 19Stagflation Cometh Strategically we remain long gold, overweight US equities, overweight UK equities, long British pound and Japanese yen, long aerospace/defense stocks and cyber security stocks. We remain short Chinese renminbi and Taiwanese dollar and short emerging European assets. Our short Chinese renminbi trade and our short Taiwanese versus Korean equity trade are our worst-performing recommendations. However, the above analysis should highlight – and the Ukraine war should underscore – that these two economies face a fundamentally negative geopolitical dynamic. Both Chinese and Taiwanese stocks have been underperforming global peers since 2021 and our short TWD-USD trade is in the money. While we do not expect war to break out in Taiwan this year, we do expect various crisis events to occur, particularly in the lead up to the crucial Taiwanese and American 2022 midterms and 2024 presidential election. We also expect China to depreciate the renminbi when inflation peaks and commodity prices subside. Cyclically we remain long North American and Latin American oil producers and short Middle Eastern producers, based on our pessimistic read of the Iran situation. The Americas are fundamentally better protected from geopolitical risks than other regions, although they continue to suffer from domestic political risks on a country-by-country basis. Cyclically we continue to take a defensive positioning, overweighting defensive sectors and large cap equities.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1      That the Russian threat fell under our third key view for 2022 implies that we did not get our priorities straight. However, consider the timing: shortly after publishing our annual outlook on December 15, the Russians issued an ultimatum to the western powers demanding that NATO stop expanding toward Russia. Diplomats from Russia and the West met on January 12-13 but Russia’s demands were not met. We upgraded the odds that Russia would invade Ukraine from 50% to 75% on January 27. Shuttle diplomacy ensued but failed. Russia invaded on February 24. Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix "Batting Average": Geopolitical Strategy Trades () Section II: Special (EDIT this Header) Section III: Geopolitical Calendar