Donald Trump insists that he is holding "serious" talks with a "more reasonable" new Iranian "regime." He stated this in a message on his social network, Truth Social, in which he once again threatened Iran with attacks on electrical, oil, and civilian facilities. "Great progress has been made, but if for some reason an agreement is not reached soon [...] and if the Strait of Hormuz is not immediately "open for business," we will conclude our charming "stay" in Iran by blowing up and completely destroying all of its power plants, oil wells, and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalination plants!), which by the way we have not yet "touched," the message stated.

Donald Trump insists he is holding "serious" talks with "a new, more reasonable" Iranian "regime." He stated this in a message on his social network, Truth Social, in which he again threatened Iran with attacks on electrical, oil, and civilian facilities. "Great progress has been made, but if for some reason a deal is not reached soon [...] and if the Strait of Hormuz is not immediately "open for business," we will conclude our lovely "stay" in Iran by completely blowing up and destroying all of its power plants, oil wells, and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalination plants!), which, by the way, we have not yet "touched," the message read.

When the conflict with Iran began, I warned that the impact on the markets would probably be a matter of days. And, with the information we had then, it was a reasonable assessment: both investors and analysts (like me) expected a short conflict. The reality, however, is quite different.

Energy markets saw trading worth $580 million – just over €500 million – moments before US President Donald Trump announced talks with Iran on Monday to resolve the conflict, triggering a drop in oil and gas prices. According to data calculated by Financial TimesBetween 6:49 and 6:50 a.m. (local time) on Monday, just 15 minutes before Trump announced the "productive" negotiations with Iran on Truth Social, approximately 6,200 futures contracts for both Brent crude oil—the European benchmark—and West Texas Intermediate crude—the U.S. benchmark—were traded. Similarly, an unusual increase in trading in S&P 500 futures was observed after the first oil transactions. This trend contrasted with the direction of the session prior to the market opening. At the moment, it is unknown whether any company is behind these extraordinary movements, and although it is difficult to prove what motivated these operations, there is speculation about possible insider trading that could benefit certain financial players. Financial TimesWhite House spokesman Kush Desai denied that the US administration allows "any administration official to illegally profit by exploiting insider information, and any insinuation that officials engage in such activities without evidence is baseless and irresponsible." "The sole focus of President Trump and his administration officials is to do what is best for the American people," the spokesman stated. On Monday, Donald Trump announced "constructive" talks with Iran and ordered a postponement of any military strikes against the Persian country's power plants. The postponement contradicted the 48-hour ultimatum announced the previous day, with which the US president sought to pressure Iran into reopening the Strait of Hormuz. These apparent signs of a cooling of the conflict in the Middle East were well received by the markets, and most stock market indices experienced gains during the day. Energy prices plummeted: the price of Brent crude fell by as much as 17%, dropping below the $100 mark.

Since the start of the war against Iran, the Israeli government has presented it as a necessary response to an existential threat. According to the official narrative, eliminating the Iranian nuclear and ballistic threat and creating the conditions to weaken the Tehran regime are top priorities. But two weeks after the start of the conflict, the situation remains unresolved: Israel claims significant military gains, while the strategic outcome is still uncertain. Publicly, the war is going well; privately, doubts are more apparent.

The main proof that things in Iran aren't going as Donald Trump planned is that in recent hours he has decided to attack the press because independent media outlets aren't buying his triumphalist narrative about the conflict. Trump doesn't like what he reads, and in a post on his social media he has directly targeted the press. New York Times and the Wall Street JournalTwo of the most prestigious media outlets in the United States are currently reporting in detail that the decision to attack Iran was made without considering its consequences, especially the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Under pressure from a November election with a high cost of living and soaring inflation due to rising oil prices, the Trump administration is trying to sell the military campaign against Iran as an unprecedented success. But most of the independent press isn't buying it. While some journalists are wondering if Donald Trump did not foresee the economic impact that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz would have.Others question the thirteen American victims that have occurred so far or investigate the bombing of a girls' school. The White House's strategy has thus far been to belittle and discredit the press.

We can't expect Trump to have read the classics, but we could at least hope he hadn't purged the entire American intelligence service. "War is a chain of accidental events that no man can control," Tolstoy wrote in War and PeaceIn his fresco on the Napoleonic Wars, Tolstoy insisted that conflicts rarely follow the plans of generals or rulers. Armies move according to strategies and doctrines, but history often advances through unexpected deviations: miscalculations, rash actions, accidents, or strokes of luck. War is, to a large extent, the realm of the unpredictable. This is why wars are so difficult to control once they have begun. Every move has new consequences, every response provokes a possible escalation, and every gesture can trigger unforeseen events. Wars spread geographically, politically, economically. And here we are. The power of uncertainty is especially visible today in the Middle East. Since the attack of October 7, 2023, the region has been undergoing one of its most profound reconfigurations, and in this scenario, the US and Israeli attack on Iran is central and has unpredictable consequences.

Mujtaba Khamenei's first public statement as Iran's Supreme Leader, read by a female voice on state media, confirmed the worst fears for the global economy by reaffirming that the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed to pressure Donald Trump and the United States. The price of oil has become the Iranian regime's main weapon in this trade war, and it seems prepared to use it to its fullest extent. In fact, immediately after Khamenei's remarks, the price of oil rose again above €100, although it subsequently fluctuated. Consumers worldwide are already feeling the effects of the trade war in their wallets, primarily through increased fuel prices, especially diesel. If the trade war drags on, the increased costs will be passed on throughout the supply chain, reaching the final product. This price increase is severely impacting Trump's electoral base in the United States, which voted for him largely on his promise to focus on lowering prices and not starting wars abroad. American farmers are seeing not only the price of diesel fuel for their tractors rise these days, but also the price of the fertilizers they need, much of which passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Their complaints are reaching Republican congressmen and senators, who are up for reelection in November and are pressuring the White House to end the intervention.

The radars of the 49th Missile Defense Battalion, based in Fort Greely (Alaska)They detect the launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) heading toward some point in the United States. They can't identify its launch point, but they know that in just over eighteen minutes, unless it's an error in the tracking satellites, it will impact its predetermined target. The military chain of command is activated, preparing to intercept it. The political structure is also set in motion to decide, ultimately by the president, whether to counterattack—against whom, but?—which could trigger a global nuclear war. This is the beginning of the gripping Netflix hit that premiered last October. In House of DynamiteFrom Kathryn Bigelow's film. In the movie, the chances of intercepting an ICBM in flight, traveling at a speed of six kilometers per second, are 61%. Do they manage to intercept the missile? No need to spoil it.

When Trump says that "Spain is a loser," also translatable as a "failed" country, he's not displaying any knowledge of history, of the loss of Cuba, from whose national depression the Generation of '98 emerged, of the Civil War, of having a Spanish army that has fired more at Spaniards than at foreigners, of Spain's history of cultural repression. Far from it, Trump says that Spain is a loser because Sánchez opposes the war, because he doesn't want to spend 5% of GDP on defense, and because now he won't let him have the American bases in Andalusia without an international mandate. This is the language of bullies: if you don't do what they want, they insult you in a humiliating way. Nor is ally Giorgia Meloni letting Trump have the Italian bases.

That all the focus is on the Iran war This doesn't make us forget the ongoing negotiations between the Catalan government and Esquerra Republicana (ERC) regarding the approval of this year's budget. We'll explain the current situation shortly. But first, a few points about the war.

The early morning brought new explosions that woke several cities in the region. In the southern suburbs of Beirut, plumes of smoke rose from buildings hit in various locations, while artillery fire continued in several border areas. Five days after the start of open warfare between Israel and Iran, the conflict is intensifying, and countries like Lebanon are once again at the center of international attention.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has become one of the most vocal critics of Donald Trump on the international stage, to the point that the White House occupant has threatened him with trade reprisals for not approving the use of the Rota and Morón air bases to attack Iran. This threat, in turn, has forced the EU to come to Madrid's support, since member states act as a single trade bloc and no member can be punished individually. But something even more significant happened this Wednesday: French President Emmanuel Macron called Sánchez to express his support. This came the day after Macron reiterated his view that the US and Israeli attack on Iran is illegal. Sánchez, therefore, can be satisfied because it has been demonstrated that he is not alone in his diplomatic stance, which is to defend the principle that any military operation must be carried out under the auspices of international law. But the Spanish president went a step further today, making it clear that for him it is not just a matter of legality but of principle. He revived the slogan of the massive demonstrations against the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the famous "No to War," and also recalled the disastrous legacy left by the "trio." It is true that George Bush, Tony Blair, and José María Aznar, as promoters of the war, set the region ablaze and turned Iraq into a hotbed of instability and jihadism. However, it is difficult not to see in this effort to bring up Iraq an electoral ploy to corner the People's Party (PP) at a time when the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) is not at its strongest and faces very tough challenges in Castile and León and Andalusia. Sánchez's speech had moments of great gravity, such as when he warned of how major catastrophes like World War I began with a series of miscalculations, and others that were decidedly more populist, such as when he said that wars "line the pockets of the same old crowd."

First we talked about the cut (the war)We'll talk about the side dishes (the Trump-Sanchez duel) later.

The open conflict between Israel, the United States, and Iran has highlighted not only the military capabilities of each actor but also the divergences in their strategies and objectives. Although the Israeli and American offensives share common goals, what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is truly seeking is not exactly the same as what US President Donald Trump is pursuing.

As expected, the Iranian regime has responded to the US and Israeli offensive against its territory by attempting to prolong the conflict as much as possible, turning it into a regional war. From day one, Tehran attacked the Persian Gulf countries where US bases are located (Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman), and this Monday, Hezbollah, Iran's allied militia in Lebanon, joined the fray, launching missiles at Israel. The conflict has even reached EU territory, as an Iranian drone struck a British base in Cyprus.

This week, veteran journalist Ehud Yaari said that no Israeli should be fooled: neither the United States nor Iran wants a war. The same can be said of the Sunni Gulf states, many of which have repeatedly expressed their support for a negotiated solution rather than weapons, as has ultimately been the case. Israel, on the other hand, has been pressing the issue until President Donald Trump gave the final order. Benjamin Netanyahu persisted until the very last moment. Now he wants to use the war to create a new situation throughout the region, a situation that would entail regime change in Tehran, with the demise of the Islamic Republic that Khomeini founded in 1979.

Donald Trump upped the ante in his standoff with Iran on Friday. Speaking to the media, he confirmed that his administration is considering a "limited" military strike. The threat, increasingly credible after the buildup of US military personnel in the region and the deployment of various types of anti-aircraft batteries to allied countries, aims to force the Tehran regime to reach a new agreement on its nuclear program. Trump has set a period of between 10 and 15 daysAn ultimatum that the president himself has described as necessary before "really bad things happen."

Stock markets are on tenterhooks this Monday. The Iranian Parliament's approval of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz—an initiative that must be ratified by the Supreme National Security Council—could be a real shock to the global economy. This passage has a maximum width of 96 kilometers and a minimum of 52, with Iran in the north and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Oman in the south. Between a fifth and a quarter of all the world's oil passes through it, between 17 and 20 million barrels per day. But such a closure would not only impact crude oil. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) could also be affected. Qatar, its main global exporter, transports almost all of its production through this strait.