저자: ChamathPalihapitiya · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 미국의 대중 대러 정책이 중국·러시아·사우디의 결속을 키워 미국 패권을 위협하고 있으며, 달러 기축 위상과 에너지 시장 구도가 변하고 있다는 주장. 지정학 배경: 분쟁 중인 국가들을 서로 밀어붙이는 것은 전략적 실수이며, 소련-중국 냉전 사례와 로마의 분할통치 원칙을 들어 미국의 대응을 비판한다. 러-우 전쟁 영향: 전쟁이 6개월째 이어지며 국제 에너지 비용 상승, 글로벌 식량 부족, 연간 인플레이션 급등을 촉발했다고 진단한다. 사우디·중국 관계: 바이든 방사우디 방문 이후 중국 시진핑의 사우디 방문이 보도되었고, 사우디가 원유 대금을 달러 대신 위안화로 받는 협의가 6년째 진행 중이라는 WSJ 보도가 언급된다. 이것이 달러 위상에 영향을 줄 수 있다고 본다. 중-러 군사 협력: 중국의 러시아 내 군사훈련 보도를 중국 영향력 확대의 신호로 해석한다. 사우디 아람코: 분기 순이익 480억 달러로 역대 최대이며, 마이크로소프트·애플·페이스북·테슬라 합산보다 많은 이익이라고 소개한다. 사우디가 아람코 지분을 매각하고 약 1,000억 달러 규모 주식 포트폴리오(알파벳, 줌, 마이크로소프트 등)를 보유하며 미국채 1,600억 달러 이상을 보유한 점을 언급한다. 에너지 전망: 유럽 천연가스 가격이 팬데믹 이후 최고 수준으로 급등했다. 전 세계 원유 생산 여력이 거의 없어 신규 공급 확대는 2028~2030년 이후가 될 것이라 보며, 자원국은 자원을 판매해 국민에게 재투자해야 한다고 주장한다. 사우디의 교육·주택·산업 투자와 노르딕 국가식 국부펀드 다각화를 긍정 평가한다. 미국 정책 평가: IRA 통과가 화석연료와 청정에너지를 같은 조건에 놓는 긍정적 조치라고 본다. 전쟁 확대 가능성에 대한 경계도 제시한다. 출연자 전망: 미국이 사우디와의 관계를 개선하고 대러 대결 구도를 재고해야 한다는 입장. 특정 자산에 대한 가격 방향 예측은 명시되지 않음.
다듬은 글
even though we have problems and conflicts with multiple nations we still don't actually want to push them into each other's arms again the soviet union and china during the cold war being the key example i mean this principle of geopolitics goes back thousands of years the romans right davide at impera divide and rule you do not want to unite your enemies and what we've done here is we keep pushing them together you know china and russia historically have not been friends they share long borders together neighbors generally have problems with each other these are nations with serious conflicts or differences of interest and we've made it really easy for china to to turn russia into the junior partner in that relationship the russia ukraine war rages on into its sixth month much like every other war there have been lots of horrific stories of outright murder rape massacres and other horrific war crimes but the impact of this brutal war extends beyond the borders of both nations the war has now reshaped international energy costs on a global basis helped create massive global food shortages and helped trigger a nasty rise in annual global inflation in addition nations are reassessing their priorities in political and trade relations with other countries to say this has been a rude awakening for several nations will be a gross understatement for instance the united states seems to be losing alley after ally to russia a situation that threatens its already shaken economy while president joe biden's visit to saudi arabia turned out to be a huge mockery of america's position as the world's superpower the country is now in talks to receive the yuan instead of dollars for oil sales in addition china's relations with russia seem to be strengthening by the day alone these are formidable forces but together the impact could be staggering for the united states which in all honesty has a lot to gain if these countries remain apart and more to lose if they form a union regardless of the intent the u.s is going to see this newly formed bond between china russia and saudi arabia as a threat to its dominance in a recent episode of the all-in podcast david freeburg david sachs and chemef pala hapatiya discussed the change in relations between these giants the effects on the united states and how the u.s might have driven these three countries into each other's arms please watch like and share this video nd subscribe let's dive right in i want to bring together a couple of of threads and get your guys's take on you know all of these things kind of coming together and what it means for foreign policy and um how things might play out on the global stage in the next um you know call it years to decades xi jinping it's been reported this week is taking a trip to saudi arabia you know this is just a few weeks after joe biden made his trip to saudi arabia i'll read a just an excerpt he's going to end his more than two years of self-imposed in-person diplomatic isolation and his first trip is going to be to saudi arabia you know this is uh from unnamed saudi sources so it's unclear this isn't an official statement this is just reporting you know the wall street journal reported in march that after six years of negotiations china and saudi arabia are getting close for china to start pay paying yuan for oil that they would be buying from the saudis um so there's an important kind of economic tie-up that may be emerging that that could affect the us dollar and the the importance of the u.s dollar on the global economic stage and meanwhile this week as well it's been reported that china is doing military exercises with russia inside russia so there is an extension of china and their influence and their economic tie-ups and their military activity with both china sorry with both russia and saudi i also want to highlight another important point that came out this week saudi aramco reported their earnings the largest earnings ever for a company 48 billion dollars of net profit in a quarter that is more profit than microsoft apple facebook and tesla combined in a single quarter it is the most profitable business and saudis have been very public about their intention of divesting their interest in saudi aramco which is their state-owned and state-run oil company and moving into other businesses over the past couple of months it's been reported that they've accumulated a nearly 100 billion dollar equity portfolio owning stocks like alphabet zoom microsoft and others it's also been reported that they own over 160 billion dollars of u.s treasuries so the u.s is very dependent in the private equity community in the vc community and in the public markets on saudi dollars saudis have been large holders of u.s dollars and now through china it looks like the saudis may be having a tie up that brings them closer to china through this trade relationship with the yuan and the visit from xi jinping while china is actively exercising you know their military inside of russia is the future a china russia saudi access and should we be concerned and should we be changing any of our tactics on foreign policy david sacks as this um you know set of threads plays out uh over the next couple of months and you know going in yes i think we do need to make some changes brian's backing away from this now but in his first year he declared the saudis be pariahs and he did push them into china's arms what was the point of that bain recently had to go to the middle east to basically beg saudi arabia to increase their production of oil so he's already acknowledged that policy didn't work and one of the reasons it didn't work is because simultaneously with declaring these allies to be enemies he basically restricted u.s energy production which is you know strategically undermined and the us has military bases in saudi arabia very strategic assets for the u.s military yeah look listen and we sell them weapons the u.s relationship with saudi arabia is always going to be complex they're a complicated friend to have but it's much better to have them as a friend than basically drive them into china's arms and the reality is whatever you think about the regime there and how oppressive it is first of all we don't get to choose the people running these countries that's the lesson we should have learned over and over again from all these failed regime change operations second do we have any reason to believe that if that regime got toppled it would get replaced with something better i think we all know that if the regime there fell it would probably be replaced with something fundamentalist that we would like even less and certainly if another nation were to basically dominate the region like iran that would be worse for us as well so our relationship with them is complicated but ultimately they should be i think allies of the united states and we should not be working overtime to push them into china's arms and i think similarly with russia we've basically declared ourselves to be engaged in this proxy war with russia which strategically there's just nothing in it for us as of early august the us government had announced a hopping nine billion dollars in military aid to ukraine over 50 billion dollars overall but many like david sacks here are questioning why we are so deeply involved in a war and that does not directly involve us and one that would no doubt result in a lot of strategic losses this article from the national interest an american bi-monthly international relations magazine perfectly captures the situation with a bold title no matter who wins ukraine america has already lost the article talks about the strategic losses the united states faces as a result of the war here is an excerpt regardless of who wins the ukrainian war the united states will be the strategic loser russia will build closer relations with china and other countries on the eurasian continent including india iran saudi arabia and the gulf states it will turn irrevocably away from european democracies in washington just as president richard nixon and henry kissinger play the china card to isolate the soviet union during the cold war presidents vladimir putin and xi jinping will play their cards in a bid to contain u.s global leadership let us know what you think about the united states involvement in the ukraine war as canadian venture capitalist chama pali hapatia gives his opinion about the new bond between china russia and saudi arabia you can sympathize with the people of ukraine all you want i mean it's dangerous you've said that in the past and i think the question is does this china military exercise in russia indicate an escalation of our conflict with china to you um you know or is this something that you know is just kind of par for the course in terms of you know neighbors you know conducting mirsheimer just had an article in foreign affairs talking about uh the ukraine war reminding us that it's still going on i think people somehow think that this war is just stable and it'll settle into forever war status kind of like like afghanistan these conflicts of middle east went on forever it's actually very dangerous it can always escalate out of control and as long as it's going on i think we just have to remember that it's going on it poses a huge global risk i think it's really dramatic to kind of paint it in these dark kind of like bipolar terms i think we are post all of that so i understand how in the cold war it was easy to fall into binary definitions of good and evil one and zero us versus them team a versus team b but in 2022 i don't think that's how things work anymore we're in a highly interconnected highly global world it's very complicated uh dollar flows are real time they're massive cooperation is real time it's all over the world it's with every country so it allows every country actually the first chance that they've ever really had to maximize their own potential for their own citizens and that's really what every country's goal is right and so in that lens look what just happened today gasprom said they're going to shut off nordstrom one just for you know a few days right but as a result of that eu nat gas has just gone absolutely nuclear and just closed at all-time highs teen x 14x where it was pandemic right uh you know price per unit for a year ahead so if you so if you take a step back we are at max energy production with all of the capacity all around the world 100 plus odd million barrels a day okay global productivity absorbs that there is very little room right now to expand that without pushing the date in which that capacity is available out until you know 20 2028 to 2030 so effectively a decade from now so if you're in this situation and you're a country with vast natural resources of which i'll just remind us america is one i think the most important thing you can do for your own citizens is to monetize these petrochemicals now get it out of the ground in a reasonable way sell them in the marketplace because there's demand for it take that money and reinvest it in your people and i think if you look at it that way the best run countries are responding to this moment in time like any company would how do you maximize demand and sell the product you have to the most number of customers globally and so i think the middle east is doing an incredible job the us by the way by passing the ira finally i think is on the right footing because we can talk about this in a moment but the path to permitting and the path to clean up and by the way it puts fossil fuels on a level playing field with with clean energy alternatives emerging alternatives yeah the best thing that could have happened okay so i think we're all behaving in a very rational market-focused way and so i would focus less on trying to dramatically kind of resolve these things as a few countries versus everybody else i don't think that's what's happening yeah much more complex much more complicated than that but i think this the simple explanation is people with resources in the ground of the country in which they rule have a responsibility if they believe that there's market demand to absorb that so that they can take the revenue that comes from it and reinvest it in their people that is true for the united states it's true for saudi arabia it's true for every country in the world yeah i mean saudi arabia is clearly making these investments right not just on yeah and by the way but also housing and new industry and education and then by the way saudi arabia and saudi arabia is becoming much more liberal as a result too right the education standards yeah and if you look at the investment like you know you didn't you you didn't need to go to dave swenson and understand portfolio allocation although i think the guys in saudi are smart enough to have probably done it but if you're if you have a lot of money coming from one kind of business and you need to make sure that you can diversify so that you can reinvest over a long period of time if you look at countries that had huge petrochemical related revenue flows the nordics what did they do they stood up these huge sovereign wealth funds and those sovereign wealth funds went abroad and they bought all kinds of non-correlated assets to those petrochemicals that is the same thing that saudi's doing now financial security for their people but it's like it's like what is the furthest uncorrelated asset from oil it turns out it's apple facebook meta and google do you agree with chimath that these countries are not out to house the united states just doing what's best for their respective countries or do you see a scenario where both points are not necessarily mutually exclusive please lso ensure you like this video so you never miss any of our videos thanks for taking the time to watch our videos and support our channel we are 150 000 subscribers strong and none of this could have happened without your support we deeply appreciate all our new and existing subscribers and viewers thanks for the continued support you
Comments 0