u/airpipeline

China appears to be quickly reducing its exposure to U.S. dollar assets while accelerating its purchases of gold and other metals. It has also tightened control over gold and silver exports, reducing authorized bullion exporters to a small number of specially approved, state-backed entities, while imposing export restrictions on several strategic minerals, including rare earths.

At the same time, Hong Kong is being turned into a much larger physical precious metals hub. The Shanghai Gold Exchange is expanding its offshore presence, additional vault and trading infrastructure are being developed in Hong Kong, and I’ve seen reports and rumors of related China-associated developments in Dubai and Europe.

This month, Hong Kong will launch a new precious metals exchange. In parallel, several of the world’s largest bullion banks are expanding their physical gold operations in Hong Kong, including moving physical gold there.

Taken together, these developments look like more than isolated policy decisions. What do you think China’s long-term objective is? Is China trying to shift physical price discovery and settlement away from London and COMEX toward Asia? (Likely) If so, what does that ultimately mean for the USD price of gold?

China appears to be quickly reducing its exposure to U.S. dollar assets while accelerating its purchases of gold and other metals. It also continues to tightly control gold and silver exports, allowing only specially authorized state-approved entities to export bullion, while imposing export restrictions on several strategic minerals, including rare earths.

At the same time, Hong Kong is being turned into a much larger physical precious metals hub. The Shanghai Gold Exchange is expanding its offshore presence, additional vault and trading infrastructure are being developed in Hong Kong, and I’ve seen reports and rumors of related China-associated developments in Dubai and Europe.

This month, Hong Kong will launch a new precious metals exchange. In parallel, several of the world’s largest bullion banks are expanding their physical gold operations in Hong Kong, including moving physical gold there.

- Is China building a yuan-plus-gold settlement system for international trade?

- Can Xi realistically create a system that allows countries to settle trade in yuan while treating gold as the underlying reserve asset?

- What will the likely implications be for the U.S. dollar price of gold and for the dollar’s role as the world’s primary reserve currency?

A cautionary note!

Ukraine has earned a reputation for adapting technology to the battlefield at extraordinary speed. Out of necessity and in combat, it has pioneered and refined the use of various types of drones, AI assisted targeting, unmanned ground vehicles, long range autonomous strikes, drone facilitated attack and defense strategies, and other emerging technologies.

The war has produced numerous military firsts. Drones have captured enemy soldiers. Assaults have been conducted with little or no direct infantry involvement. Unmanned systems have struck targets hundreds of miles from the front, including in and around Moscow. Military technology companies around the world have noticed and are increasingly treating the conflict as a real world laboratory for testing and refining new systems.

What receives far less attention is that Russia is learning too.

Russia has scaled up fiber optic drones, massively expanded drone production, integrated electronic warfare into drone operations, and continuously adapted its tactics in response to battlefield conditions. The war is giving Russia something that is difficult to acquire in peacetime: years of large scale combat experience with emerging military technologies.

Eventually, the war will end. Phew, finally!

Ukraine will emerge with enormous expertise in military automation and battlefield innovation. Democratic nations will seek partnerships with Ukrainian firms and engineers, and ideally Ukraine’s expertise will become a valuable export.

But Russia will emerge with expertise as well.

Russia is exhausted and economically damaged, but it will also possess years of hard won experience developing, manufacturing, and deploying autonomous and semi autonomous military systems under real combat conditions. Its traditional weapons industry has suffered reputational damage, but its experience with the technologies likely to define future warfare continues to grow.

The most important lesson of this war may not involve tanks, artillery, or fighter aircraft. It may be that inexpensive autonomous systems can neutralize or exhaust vastly more expensive conventional weapons. A drone costing tens of thousands of dollars can cause the expenditure of interceptor missiles costing millions. That is an exchange ratio military planners cannot ignore.

My prediction is that Russia will eventually become a major exporter of inexpensive, battle tested military automation. The longer the war continues, the more opportunities Russia has to refine its technology, manufacturing, doctrine, and operational experience.

If the war drags on for several more years, it is not difficult to imagine increasingly sophisticated AI driven autonomous and deadly combat systems emerging from the conflict.

The longer Russia remains in the fight, the more technologically capable and dangerous it will be afterward.

Edit: I really appreciate all the responses! And I notice that most may be missing the point. Yes, compared to Ukraine, Russia may be sucking eggs. Granted. Nonetheless, they have both pushed ahead of the rest of the world.

Edit: But when compared to NATO, in important ways, they are ahead. When NATO recently gamed drone warfare scenarios, NATO was destroyed. Even in Iran, where I assume Iran does not have the latest Russian technology, numerous U.S. bases have been evacuated because they cannot be protected cost effectively.

American flag blue… ah, green. The blue Reflecting Pool… ah, green Reflecting Pool.

Date: July 4, 2026

Evidence: Remember the U.S. Weather Service map that included a hand-drawn storm track extending into Alabama in support of the U.S. president saying that a hurricane might affect Alabama. Mastery of weather forecasting.

Second time around, the U.S. president has hundreds of people with one job: to turn whatever he says into reality, whatever the cost.

As an example, at his demand, and for more than $10 million over the originally projected $2 million cost, they painted the bottom of the Reflecting Pool “American flag blue” for the Fourth.

Now, already, that same pool is algae green (and the sealer is peeling).

Good thought, I suppose. As we have come to expect, execution: meh. No-bid contract, pain failing already, blown up into a terrorist plot.

The contractor, Greenwater Services. Perhaps one person’s terrorist is simply another us president’s preferred contractor?

Watch out, U.S. flag!

Good thought I suppose. Execution meh. No bid contract, failed already, turned it into a terrorism plot. The contractor, Greenwater Services. Perhaps one person’s terrorist is another’s preferred contractor?

Watch out U.S. flag!

Ukraine has earned a reputation for adapting technology to the battlefield at extraordinary speed. Out of necessity, it has pioneered and refined the use of drones, AI assisted targeting, unmanned ground vehicles, long range autonomous strikes, and other emerging technologies.

The war has produced numerous military firsts. Drones have captured enemy soldiers. Assaults have been conducted with little or no direct infantry involvement. Unmanned systems have struck targets hundreds of miles from the front, including in and around Moscow. Military technology companies around the world have noticed and are increasingly treating the conflict as a real world laboratory for testing and refining new systems.

What receives far less attention is that Russia is learning too.

Russia has scaled up fiber optic drones, massively expanded drone production, integrated electronic warfare into drone operations, and continuously adapted its tactics in response to battlefield conditions. The war is giving Russia something that is difficult to acquire in peacetime: years of large scale combat experience with emerging military technologies.

Eventually, the war will end. Phew, finally!

Ukraine will emerge with enormous expertise in military automation and battlefield innovation. Democratic nations will likely seek partnerships with Ukrainian firms and engineers, and Ukraine’s experience will become a valuable export.

But Russia will emerge with expertise as well.

Russia will be exhausted and economically damaged, but it will also possess years of hard won experience developing, manufacturing, and deploying autonomous and semi autonomous military systems under real combat conditions. Its traditional weapons industry has suffered reputational damage, but its experience with the technologies likely to define future warfare continues to grow.

The most important lesson of this war may not involve tanks, artillery, or fighter aircraft. It may be that inexpensive autonomous systems can neutralize or exhaust vastly more expensive conventional weapons. A drone costing tens of thousands of dollars can cause the expenditure of interceptor missiles costing millions. That is an exchange ratio military planners cannot ignore.

My prediction is that Russia will eventually become a major exporter of inexpensive, battle tested military automation. The longer the war continues, the more opportunities Russia has to refine its technology, manufacturing, doctrine, and operational expertise.

If the war drags on for several more years, it is not difficult to imagine increasingly sophisticated AI driven autonomous and deadly combat systems emerging from the conflict.

The longer Russia remains in the fight, the more technologically capable and dangerous it will be afterward.

Edit: I really appreciate all the responses! And I notice that most may be missing the point. Yes, compared to Ukraine, Russia may be sucking eggs. Granted.

Edit: But when compared to NATO, in important ways, they are ahead. When NATO recently gamed drone warfare scenarios, NATO was destroyed. Even in Iran, where I assume Iran does not have the latest Russian technology, numerous U.S. bases have been evacuated because they cannot be protected cost effectively.

Date: Within five years of the end of the Russia-Ukraine War

Ukraine has earned a reputation for adapting technology to the battlefield at extraordinary speed. Out of necessity, it has pioneered and refined the use of drones, AI-assisted targeting, unmanned ground vehicles, long-range autonomous strikes, and other emerging technologies.

The war has produced numerous military firsts. Drones have captured enemy soldiers. Assaults have been conducted with little or no direct infantry involvement. Unmanned systems have struck targets hundreds of miles from the front, including in and around Moscow. Military technology companies around the world have noticed and are using the conflict as a real-world laboratory for testing and refining new systems.

What receives less attention is that Russia is learning too.

Russia may be less innovative than Ukraine, and sanctions may limit its capabilities, but it is still adapting rapidly. Russia was the first to scale fiber optic drones, they expanded drone production, integrated electronic warfare into drone operations, and continuously modify tactics in response to battlefield conditions. The war is giving Russia something that is difficult to obtain in peacetime: years of large-scale combat experience with new and emerging military technologies.

Eventually, the war will end. Phew, finally!

Ukraine will emerge with enormous expertise in military automation and battlefield innovation. The democratic world will likely seek partnerships with Ukrainian firms and engineers, and Ukraine’s experience will become a valuable export.

But Russia will emerge with expertise as well.

Evidence:

Not unlike Ukraine, Russia will be exhausted, face serious economic challenges, and their government may be angry and most likely will remain hostile to the West. Its traditional weapons industry has suffered reputational damage, but it is continuously gaining experience with the technologies that will likely define future warfare.

The lesson of this war may not be tanks, artillery, or fighter aircraft. It will be that inexpensive autonomous and semi-autonomous systems can defeat or exhaust vastly more expensive traditional weapons. A drone costing tens of thousands of dollars forcing the expenditure of missiles costing millions is not a sustainable.

My prediction is that Russia will become a major exporter of inexpensive, battle-tested military automation. The longer the war continues, the more opportunities Russia has to refine, improve and advance their skills under real combat conditions.

If the war drags on for years more, it is not difficult to imagine increasingly sophisticated deadly AI-driven autonomous combat systems emerging from the battlefield tech hothouse.

The longer Russia remains in the fight, the more technologically dangerous it will be afterward.

Date: resolution; sometime after the U.S. midterm elections, or after the USA caves due to energy shortage induced global unrest.

It is not winning until the Strait of Hormuz is open.

The USA is blockading the Iranian blockade to hide the fact that it is unable open the Strait. At least, it cannot get Iran to open it without offering concessions that are sure to embarrass the U.S. president and, by extension, the United States.

Yes, a very costly and unpopular invasion ~might achieve this goal, but allies in the vicinity oppose this. For instance, very wealthy countries like Saudi have closed their airspace to the USA.

While the Iranian regime was pummeled, it survived and is very angry. They are small, funded and after an overt attack have solidified control over their population. What incentive can the United States really offer that will outweigh the Iranian Regime interest in and joy at being able to wait and watch as the world (correctly) blames the U.S. president for disrupting the global economy?

Evidence: Negotiations are being facilitated by Pakistan. Who, in a position of power, would agree to that? For one, Pakistan gave Iran their nuclear material. They are not exactly a friend of the USA or thinking we need to temper Iran.

As long as the Strait remains closed or shipping remains severely limited, the U.S. president’s claims of peace or victory, as with all claims to this point, are premature.

Date: immediately

Evidence:

As Russia attacks civilians in Romania:

- Russia, despite its leader Vlad Putin repeatedly proclaiming victory, is faltering in Ukraine.
- The USA, despite the US president repeatedly proclaiming victory, is faltering in Iran.
- The USA having now emptied it weapons stockpile from Korea has virtually exhausted its reserve weapons.
- The U.S. president has already abandoned a clear western ally, Ukraine, in favor of cuddling with the Russian dictator Vlad Putin.
- Russia understands that credibility matters. (While the U.S. president apparently has no idea) If the USA cannot or will not defend a NATO ally, then American promises become worth no more than Russian promises.

Russia understands that the world has spent years criticizing Russia's inability to achieve a quick victory in Ukraine.

Now Russia has an opportunity to cause the world to ask a simple question:

"Can the United States do any better?"

Romania provides a test.

If the USA fails to respond effectively, Russia demonstrates that American security guarantees are hollow.

If the USA responds and still cannot quickly impose its will, like in Iran, Russia demonstrates that American power has limits just like Russian power has limits.

Either outcome helps Russia.

The objective is not Romania itself.

The objective is to restore order in Russia, likely through mobilization, while also showing the world that the United States is no more capable of enforcing its will than Russia has been in Ukraine.

In the meantime except for the nuclear saber rattling, China is laughing all the way to the bank and maybe into Taiwan.

I mean really. Okay, the U.S. government has made clear it no longer sees supporting Ukraine as a primary American responsibility but isn’t it still illegal to attack civilians and threaten embassies, including the U.S. embassy?

Historically, the USA would loudly condemn threats against diplomatic facilities and civilian targets. Now they say nothing.

Is this some sort of arrangement like with China and Russia, where China doesn’t condemn Russia’s “special military operation” so that when China attacks Taiwan, Russia won’t protest?

Even China, Russia’s most important diplomatic partner, has urged restraint and warned against escalation.

So what’s the U.S. play here? How are they benefiting from silence?

The U.S. president tore down the East Wing, effectively an office building and public entryway, largely in secret, to build a dance hall and a personal bunker. That seems like a near perfect metaphor for the current president and his thoughts on governance.

Even the manner in which it was done is revealing: quietly removing part of the actual machinery of government to replace it with spectacle and his personal defense.

In the U.S. president’s mind, what work does a president and his office actually need to do?

He’s out “working” on the golf course every day. The actual machinery of government is simply secondary to spectacle, his image, blind loyalty, and overt offense.

Does the current president fancy himself a statesman, or has he modeled himself on a professional wrestler? He only needs a constant show, the ballroom, and a good defensive position, the bunker, preferably built after demolishing the inconvenient oversight of democratic government, as quietly and quickly as possible.

Example: Kuwait
- Lots of assets
- Lots of U.S. Treasuries
- Sudden cash squeeze because they have not been able to sell oil since the Strait of Hormuz was shutdown.

As I understand it:
- They tell the U.S. Treasury/Fed that they will need to sell Treasuries for USD liquidity
- The U.S. side fears that large Treasury sales will push long term interest rates higher. Instead, they offer to provide dollar liquidity against those Treasuries. Effectively, they print dollars repaying the coupon early to prevent rates from rising naturally.

This looks like money printing to suppress wartime funding pressure. Especially as the USA starts its ground invasion of Iran, this program is likely going to expand.

How will this ultimately affect the purchasing power of ordinary USD holders? When will people start to notice what this is saying about the U.S. central bank? How will this affect? For instance might stop the falling gold price?

I have five TiVo boxes, from the free original TiVo up to an Edge. Some/most have lifetime subscriptions. Who might want these?

The Comcast’s proprietary signal format killed my ability to use them.

TIVo was great, still the best way to watch TV ever.

If this has been asked before, apologies.