A Soybean faux-détente
Two geopolitical analysts discuss Trump's Beijing summit with Xi Jinping, the Iran conflict's impact on global shipping, US-Mexico relations, Cuba protests, and AOC's political positioning. They debate whether the US-China détente is meaningful or just 'soybean diplomacy,' and explore the structural forces that may prevent lasting improvement in bilateral relations.
Summary
The podcast opens with the hosts reviewing Donald Trump's trip to Beijing for a summit with Xi Jinping, recorded on May 14th. One host argues that while the cynical 'expert take' dismisses the meeting as vacuous soybean deals, the summit represents the beginning of a genuine détente between the two superpowers. He contends that Trump always intended to land the plane on US-China relations, pointing to the Phase One deal being deliberately named 'Phase One' as evidence of a longer strategy that was derailed by COVID-19. The other host pushes back, arguing that Trump lacks the cabinet support, domestic political backing, and Chinese concessions necessary to make any improvement in bilateral relations outlast his own administration.
The hosts explore the structural forces shaping US-China relations, including the military-intelligence complex centered in Northern Virginia that profits from treating China as an enemy, and the post-Snowden shift of Silicon Valley software companies who wrapped themselves in the American flag after losing access to Chinese markets. However, they identify a new countervailing force: hardware companies like Nvidia and Tesla whose business interests require access to China, potentially creating a new pro-engagement lobbying bloc. They also discuss how the Biden administration's extreme hawkishness on China was partly driven by Democrats' historical insecurity about appearing soft on national security threats.
The conversation shifts to the Iran conflict, with the hosts noting that China's foreign minister met with Iran's foreign minister in Beijing, after which 30 Chinese ships passed through the Strait of Hormuz under an Iranian agreement on 'strait management protocols.' They mock a Pentagon report using a 'DIME framework' (Diplomatic, Informational, Military, Economic) to assess China's gains from the conflict, arguing the conclusions were obvious without the bureaucratic apparatus. One host speculates that China may effectively become the destination hub for Middle Eastern commodities if Chinese ships are the only ones Iran allows through Hormuz, effectively undermining the US blockade of Iranian exports.
On US-Mexico relations, the hosts catalogue a series of escalating provocations: Hegseth threatening unilateral US action against cartels, Trump alluding to US forces already operating in Mexico, a DEA chief promising more indictments, Treasury considering sanctions against a major Mexican financial institution, and CNN reports of CIA operations inside Mexico targeting cartel leaders. One host argues this threatens the USMCA renegotiation and Mexican sovereignty in ways that could politically destabilize President Claudia Sheinbaum. The other provocatively suggests the average Mexican voter might actually welcome direct US intervention against cartels even if the political elite cannot say so publicly, comparing the dynamic to the Sicario and Landman cultural touchstones.
Briefly, the hosts note accelerating protests in Cuba amid fuel and medicine shortages, and a US move to indict Raul Castro related to a plane downing 30 years ago, comparing it to the legal strategy used to eventually detain Nicolas Maduro.
The episode closes with an analysis of an AOC clip where she argues that no one can legitimately earn a billion dollars. One host argues this represents an ideological own-goal compared to her earlier, more technocratic arguments about tax rates. He contrasts her current demonization of wealth with her prior mathematical arguments about tax policy, suggesting she is testing presidential trial balloons but making a strategic mistake. Both hosts agree she is charismatic and authentic in the way Trump is, placing her and Trump as populist extremes far from centrist moderates. The episode ends with a brief discussion of the chaotic California gubernatorial race.
About this episode
<p>Trump and Xi shook hands in Beijing, and yes, the soccer mom in all of us should appreciate that two nuclear superpowers are behaving like adults. But let's not kid ourselves :) soybeans and Boeing orders don't a détente make. JShap thinks Trump can't carry the baton; Marko says he's the only one who can land the plane he launched. Meanwhile, the CIA's running around Mexico, Cuba's running out of diesel, and AOC is sharpening her ideological fangs. </p><p>After Dark, as advertised.</p><p>--</p><p><strong><u>Timestamps:</u></strong></p><p>(00:00) - Show rundown and updates</p><p>(00:45) - After Dark banter</p><p>(01:47) - Trump meets Xi</p><p>(02:47) - Why the summit matters</p><p>(05:42) - Messaging and skepticism</p><p>(08:04) - Military intelligence complex</p><p>(09:46) - Tech split and hardware lobby</p><p>(14:05) - Globalization lessons and leverage</p><p>(20:29) - COVID and Nixon to China</p><p>(25:00) - Who carries the baton</p><p>(34:46) - China economics and engineering state</p><p>(37:54) - Consumers inflation and pain tolerance</p><p>(46:12) - Pentagon report dime framework</p><p>(46:57) - DIME Framework Roast</p><p>(47:53) - China and Hormuz Deal</p><p>(52:11) - Chinese Shipping Boom</p><p>(53:02) - Gulf Commodities Pivot</p><p>(55:11) - US China Mixed Signals</p><p>(59:12) - Mexico Relationship Flashpoints</p><p>(01:01:23) - Cuba Protests and Indictments</p><p>(01:03:27) - Do Mexicans Want Help</p><p>(01:06:02) - CIA vs Delta Force Debate</p><p>(01:12:47) - AOC Billionaire Clip</p><p>(01:19:21) - Populism and Corruption</p><p>(01:26:56) - California Race Wrap Up</p><p>--</p><p><strong><u>Referenced in the Show:</u></strong></p><p></p><p>--</p><p><strong>Geopolitical Cousins</strong> is produced and edited by Audiographies LLC. More information at <a href="https://audiographies.com" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">audiographies.com</a></p><p>--</p><p><strong>Jacob Shapiro</strong> is a speaker, consultant, author, and researcher covering global politics and affairs, economics, markets, technology, history, and culture. He speaks to audiences of all sizes around the world, helps global multinationals make strategic decisions about political risks and opportunities, and works directly with investors to grow and protect their assets in today’s volatile global environment. His insights help audiences across industries like finance, agriculture, and energy make sense of the world.</p><p><strong>Jacob Shapiro Site:</strong> <a href="https://jacobshapiro.com" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">jacobshapiro.com</a></p><p><strong>Jacob Shapiro LinkedIn: </strong><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacob-l-s-a9337416" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">linkedin.com/in/jacob-l-s-a9337416</a></p><p><strong>Jacob Twitter:</strong> <a href="https://x.com/JacobShap" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">x.com/JacobShap</a></p><p><strong>Jacob Shapiro Substack: </strong><a href="https://jashap.substack.com/subscribe" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">jashap.substack.com/subscribe </a></p><p>--</p><p><strong>Marko Papic</strong> is a macro and geopolitical expert at BCA Research, a global investment research firm. He provides in-depth analysis that combines geopolitics and markets in a framework called GeoMacro. He is also the author of Geopolitical Alpha: An Investment Framework for Predicting the Future.</p><p><strong>Marko’s Book & Newsletter:</strong> <a href="https://www.geopoliticalalpha.com/marko-papic" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">www.geopoliticalalpha.com/marko-papic </a></p><p><strong>Marko’s Linkedin:</strong> <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/marko-papic-geopolitics/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.linkedin.com/in/marko-papic-geopolitics/</a></p><p><strong>Marko’s Twitter:</strong> <a href="https://x.com/Geo_papic" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://x.com/Geo_papic</a></p><p><strong>Marko’s Macro & Geopolitical Research at BCA:</strong> <a href="https://www.bcaresearch.com/marketing/geomacro" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.bcaresearch.com/marketing/geomacro</a></p>
Key Insights
- One host argues Trump always intended a Phase One, Two, and Three deal with China, and that COVID-19 — not a change in strategy — derailed his plan to normalize relations by his second term.
- The hosts contend that Silicon Valley software companies became vociferous China hawks after the Snowden revelations locked them out of the Chinese market, wrapping themselves in the American flag to reposition as national security assets.
- One host identifies Nvidia, Tesla, and hardware manufacturers as a new lobbying force that actively wants to re-engage with China, potentially counterbalancing the military-intelligence complex that profits from treating China as an enemy.
- The hosts argue that Trump is uniquely positioned — like Nixon going to China — to normalize US-China relations precisely because he was the one who launched the propaganda campaign against China, giving him credibility that no Democratic candidate currently possesses.
- One host claims that 30 Chinese ships passed through the Strait of Hormuz under an Iranian agreement specifically exempting Chinese vessels, suggesting China has effectively negotiated a workaround to the US blockade without paying tolls or taking a public stance.
- The hosts mock a Pentagon 'DIME framework' report on China's gains from the Iran conflict, produced for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, arguing its conclusions were obvious and that its existence reveals institutional resistance to Trump's détente while he was literally in Beijing.
- One host speculates that China could become the destination hub for all Middle Eastern commodities if Chinese ships are the only ones Iran permits through Hormuz, effectively redirecting Gulf oil flows toward Beijing and away from Western markets.
- The hosts argue the Biden administration's extreme China hawkishness was driven by liberal Democrats' historical insecurity about appearing soft on national security, causing former pro-engagement policymakers to become 'foaming at the mouth' China hawks.
- One host argues that globalization did not fail — rather, the US failed at globalization by not redistributing gains to displaced workers and by failing to enforce IP protections against China when American corporations complained about theft.
- One host contends that the median Mexican voter would likely welcome direct US military action against cartels even though Mexican political elites cannot say so publicly due to the country's deep cultural obsession with sovereignty.
- The hosts argue AOC's recent claim that 'you can't earn a billion dollars' represents a strategic own-goal compared to her earlier technocratic arguments about tax rates, shifting from a mathematical debate about redistribution to an ideological attack on the legitimacy of success itself.
- One host suggests that Trump and AOC occupy similar populist positions on the ideological spectrum — both authentic and charismatic — while centrist moderates like Senator Tillis are actually further from both of them than the two populists are from each other.
Topics
Transcript
Hello, listeners. Welcome to a little Geopolitical Cousins After Dark. We hit the US-China Trump-Xi Jinping meeting. We hit Iran war. We hit Mexico, Cuba, a little bit of US domestic politics and AOC at the end of the episode. Our big trade value leader index coming out next week. So if you are looking for even more cousins, you will have it quite shortly. Otherwise, you can email me at jacob at jacobshapiro.com. If you have any questions, comments, concerns, et cetera, that stuff we'll get to Marco as well. I think that's it. We'll see you out there. Hey, listener. Yeah, I'm talking to you. It's Cousins After Dark. How are you doing today? I'm very excited about…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from Geopolitical Cousins
The King of Israel
The podcast episode discusses the ongoing geopolitical dynamics surrounding Iran, the U.S., and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, highlighting how these situations affect global perceptions and alliances. The speakers contemplate the implications of shifting alliances, especially the potential normalization of relations between the U.S. and Iran, and the corresponding impact on regional stability in the Middle East.
Lessons Learned
Four geopolitical strategists discuss their formative experiences, intellectual development, and the state of geopolitical analysis as a discipline. They explore what it takes to become an effective analyst, critique academia's failures in training practitioners, and debate whether corporations need dedicated chief geopolitical officers.
This Is The Way The World Ends (w/ Zeihan & Gertken)
Four geopolitical analysts discuss how the world could end within 10 years through interconnected crises: de-globalization and demographic collapse (Zeihan), Russian political instability and potential nuclear conflict (Gertken), Chinese aggression driven by insecurity amid technological change (Gerken), and the erosion of the nation-state model alongside systemic complexity (Gerken). They argue that declining demand, aging populations, fragile supply chains, and emerging autonomous military technologies create cascading vulnerabilities with no single solution.
What We Got Wrong About The World Cup (A LOT)
A podcast discussion analyzing the 2026 World Cup through quantitative modeling, geopolitical implications, and spectator experience. The hosts evaluate what their BCA Research model predicted correctly (26 of 32 knockout games), what it missed (upsets like Cape Verde and Switzerland), and debate broader issues from Messi's performance to FIFA corruption and immigration policy.
Operation Fun Run
Two geopolitical analysts discuss escalating tensions in the Strait of Hormuz between the U.S. and Iran following tanker attacks in early July, analyzing how oil prices function as an independent variable driving conflict cycles rather than a dependent variable to be forecast. They debate whether current hostilities represent a brief tit-for-tat negotiation or the start of a sustained second war, with one forecasting de-escalation around $100-120 oil prices and the other expressing concern about uncontrolled spiraling given depleted U.S. strategic reserves.