Authored by ‘No1’ via Gold and Geopolitics substack,

The bombs make headlines. The economic unraveling happening quietly underneath them don’t. So before we get back to the daily carnage, let’s talk about money. It used to be funny, in a rich man’s world.

The world didn’t wake up one morning and decide to distrust the dollar. It was a process. Gradually, then suddenly, as these things tend to go.

It started with Venezuela. In 2019, Caracas asked the Bank of England to return its own gold – 31 tonnes, sitting in a vault in London, belonging to the Venezuelan central bank. The Bank of England said no. The justification was creative: London had decided to recognise a man who had never won an election as Venezuela’s “legitimate” president, so it couldn’t very well hand $2 billion in gold to the actual government. Problem solved. Maduro was a dictator, everyone agreed he was terrible, and so the consensus was essentially: who cares.

Everyone filed it under “rogue state gets what it deserves” and moved on.

Then Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, and $300 billion in Russian sovereign reserves got frozen overnight. Again, the justification was airtight, the villain was obvious, and the Western financial world applauded itself. What nobody wanted to discuss was the precedent. Assets held in Western financial institutions were no longer safe if the political winds shifted against you. That was new. That was genuinely new. And every central bank and sovereign wealth fund on earth noticed, even if they did say nothing publicly.

Then Trump came back. Tariffs on allies. Threats to annex Greenland. The implicit message that the post-war security architecture was now a negotiable service rather than a commitment. The dollar’s reserve currency status had always rested on two pillars: the dominance of the US economy, and the reliability of the US government as a custodian of the system. One of those pillars was now being kicked.

By the time the Iran war started, the trust account was already badly overdrawn.

The petrodollar was a simple deal. The Gulf states price their oil in dollars, recycle the surplus into US Treasuries, and in exchange get American military protection. Clean, elegant, and – for fifty years – it actually worked. The US got permanent demand for its currency and its debt. The Gulf got security guarantees backed by the most powerful military on earth.

Five decades of procurement scandals and DEI hires later, someone called the bluff.

US bases across the Gulf – Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE – were always sold as the physical expression of the guarantee. The muscle that backed the paper. They were protection. Except now those bases are targets. The countries hosting them are getting hit precisely because they host them. What once was “US military presence as shield” has collapsed and became “US military presence as a bullseye”.

Medvedev put it with the particular relish of someone who has been waiting years to say it:

You can dismiss Medvedev on most things. On this one, his timing is sublime.

I already cover the daily physical damage to Gulf infrastructure in my Iran series, so I won’t repeat it here. The point here aren’t the bombs. The point is what the bombs have made obvious: the protection America sold the GCC was a liability dressed up as an asset.

And increasingly it seems that the Gulf states are discussing pulling their investment commitments from the US. Not done yet. Discussing. They are not floating the possibility quietly in private rooms – they are saying it out loud, which means the market already knows which direction they’re heading.

Capital won’t wait for a formal declaration. It will already leave in advance, quietly, and then when the announcement comes, everyone will pretend to be surprised…

This is the engine that kept the whole fiat USD thing running: Gulf sells oil → receives dollars → buys Treasuries → US borrowing costs stay manageable → repeat. For decades. And what keeps that loop turning isn’t economics. It’s trust. The belief that Washington is a reliable partner, that dollar-denominated assets are safe, and that the security umbrella is real.

But the trust was already shredded before the first bomb fell on Iran.

The US Treasury market is in a bit of a pickle. I believe the technical term is “clusterfuck”.

About $9.2 trillion in US Treasuries rolled over in fiscal 2025 – roughly a third of all outstanding federal debt – and the 2026 refinancing wave is already building. Annual interest payments on the federal debt have crossed $1 trillion for the first time. The Treasury is buying back its own debt in tranches to keep the market from seizing up. But the 10-year yield keeps moving higher regardless.

The petrodollar recycling loop was one of the structural forces keeping Treasury auctions clearing. When Gulf sovereigns stop buying – or start selling – somebody else has to absorb that supply. At higher rates. Which makes the interest burden worse. Which makes the deficit worse. Which requires more issuance. The spiral is not complicated.

And underneath all of this sits a deeper shift that doesn’t get enough attention. The world is migrating from a currency-based monetary order to a collateral-based one. For decades, Treasuries were the global safe asset – the thing you held when you didn’t know what else to hold. That status is eroding. What’s replacing it, are commodities. Physical stuff™. Things you can actually use. Which is – not coincidentally – exactly what the GCC is sitting on, and exactly what the US has just demonstrated it cannot protect.

Gold and silver hit record after record last year for the same reason. Not inflation. Not rate expectations. Something older and simpler: people are looking for a store of value that doesn’t require trusting a government that has made itself unpredictable.

Meanwhile, private credit is starting to make interesting noises.

source

Blue Owl gated its retail private credit fund in February after redemption requests doubled through 2025. Today, BlackRock announced its $26 billion private credit fund is limiting withdrawals too [-4% at the open]. The same BlackRock that just wrote a private loan to zero – a loan marked at par three months ago. The second time it’s done that.

Rubric Capital – a Point72 spinout – sent a letter to its own LPs this week calling private credit a fraudulent bubble and accusing players of “Enron-like accounting” to hide the rot.

Whether Gulf sovereign wealth funds are behind any of this is speculation. What isn’t speculation is the pattern. Capital that was deployed into US private markets on the assumption of political stability and reliable returns is trying to get out. “Canary in the coal mine” is how one analyst described the Blue Owl situation. The canary is dead. It has ceased to be. It is an ex-canary. And BlackRock just joined the funeral.

Nobody told the AI crowd. The Mag7 have committed $600 billion in AI capex for 2026 alone – an amount so large it requires its own stable financial universe to make sense. Cheap dollars. Stable long-term rates. A Treasury market with reliable buyers. As I wrote in “The Trillion Dollar Oops” (link), it’s a beautiful circular system: Big Tech borrows cheaply, buys GPUs, GPU makers reinvest in Big Tech, everyone marks up each other’s valuations, and round it goes. The whole thing runs on the assumption that the dollar system stays intact.

It’s currently on fire.

Capital is already rotating out – emerging markets have dramatically outperformed the S&P since January 2025, and it’s accelerating. The AI capex cycle and the capital flight cycle are running in opposite directions.

Something has to give. Burning refineries don’t care about your capex commitments.

The entire purpose of US power projection in the Middle East – the bases, the carrier groups, the security guarantees – was always to protect the dollar system. To keep the oil flowing in dollars, the recycling loop turning. Not out of the goodness of its heart. It allowed the US to run deficits indefinitely, export inflation to the rest of the world, and borrow at rates no other debtor could ever dream of.

Whether Washington chose this war or simply couldn’t say no when Israel saw its chance and leapt – that’s still an open question. What isn’t open is the result. The Gulf states are under attack because they host US bases.

Either way, the GCC is finding out what “ally” means in practice.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

If you thought Gen Z arriving was the long-awaited antidote to the famously coddled Millennials, you might want to rethink that theory.

A new survey from career site Zety polled 1,000 Gen Z workers and found that a whopping 44% of these young workers had Mom or Dad help write or edit their resumes, while 20% admitted that a parent had joined them during a job interview (15% in-person, 5% virtually).

“Some in Gen Z feel having parental involvement when looking and applying for jobs is important, and I would certainly advocate for taking advice from parents and other mentors who have experience gaining employment,” a financial literacy instructor at the University of Tennessee at Martin said in an interview with Newsweek. “However, there are limits to this engagement, and they almost always end poorly for the applicant.”

If you thought those figures were grim, the hand-holding extends even after the job offer letter arrives. Roughly 28% of Gen Z professionals admitted that parents assisted with pay or benefits negotiations, and 32% cited parents as their main influence for career choices.

“There’s a lingering distrust between workers and corporations. While it’s not widespread, some Gen Z candidates are leaning on their parents for interview support – presentation, tone, even responses,” 9i Capital Group CEO Kevin Thompson told Newsweek. “A lot of that comes down to inexperience with professional settings and discomfort with contract language and expectations.”

The trend has rightfully drawn scorn from critics, including “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary, who warned that any candidate arriving with a parental escort would be shown the door immediately.

“First question I’d have to the son or daughter, I’d say, ‘Do you want me to hire your mother or you? What’s she doing here?’” O’Leary told Fox Business. “That resume goes right into the garbage in one of my operations.” He recounted a recent virtual interview where the phenomenon played out in real time.

“It happened to me on a Zoom call, and I just said, this isn’t going to work… Your mom is not gonna be part of this discussion,” the businessman added. “It means you can’t do this on your own. It’s a horrific signal,”

The BBC has been caught yet again manipulating comments from the Trump administration to radically alter their meaning. 

During a March 2 press conference about the war in Iran, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said that the United States is bringing death to the same regime that chanted “death to America.”

BBC Persia, however, substituted the word ‘people’ for ‘regime’ – fundamentally changing Hegseth’s meaning to sound like America was targeting all Iranians vs. the regime. 

“It turns out the regime who chanted ‘death to America and death to Israel was gifted death from America and death from Israel,” is what Hegseth actually said. 

The BBC translated the word “regime” as “mardom,” the Persian word for “people.” It later issued a correction. 

The BBC “mistakenly” altered a speech by Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth on the war in Iran, making him appear to say the United States was targeting the Iranian “people”.

This comes only a handful of months since they did the same to President Trump.

Defund the BBC! pic.twitter.com/iezrIh5vFX

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) March 7, 2026

While we’re sure Israel and America will kill plenty of non-regime Iranians by the time this is done, mainstream media like the BBC isn’t doing anything for its reputation by shaping narratives. 

The Trump administration has argued that that Tehran’s leadership, not regular Iranians, pose a direct threat to American national security because they’ve been chanting “death to America” (for the past 50 years), which justified Trump reneging on his repeated campaign promises not to start new wars. 

The error drew condemnation from Iranians online, who accused the BBC of conflating ordinary civilians with the brutality of the regime and altering the meaning of Mr Hegseth’s speech. Others disagreed, saying the translation was acceptable.

The US president has called on the Iranian people to rise up and overthrow the leadership. On Monday, Mr Hegseth repeated that call, urging civilians to “take advantage of this incredible opportunity”. -Telegraph

According to Iran expert Thamar Eilam-Gindin of Haifa University, the BBC had “fundamentally altered the meaning” of Hegseth’s words. 

“By mistranslating the English word ‘regime’ into the Persian word ‘mardom’ —meaning ‘people’—the BBC’s Persian service fundamentally altered the meaning of the US secretary of defence’s speech, making it appear as though he were attacking all Iranians rather than the Islamic Republic,” Eilam-Gindin told the Telegraph.

“Among members of the Iranian diaspora in the West, with whom I am in regular contact, this incident reinforces what they perceive as a long-standing pro-regime editorial line at BBC Persian.” 

Explaining their actions, the BBC said “This mistranslated word was a mistake, as a result of human error, during the live simultaneous translation of a speech. We issued a correction to Persian audiences on air and on social media.”

Mistranslation is a very generous way to describe something that looks deliberate.

— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) March 6, 2026

That said, perhaps Hegseth should choose his words a tad more carefully (the last 20 seconds or so):

As requested 😉 pic.twitter.com/ngk1DX2SaB

— Mr. Gerald Wayne (@geraldwayne) March 7, 2026

The ‘mistranslation’ echoes the BBC’s deceptive editing of Trump’s January 6, 2021 speech to falsely portray him as inciting violence at the Capitol, which earned them a $10 billion lawsuit. 

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

A leaked draft of the UK Government’s new ‘social cohesion’ strategy has sparked outrage by labeling the flying of English, Scottish, and Union Jack flags as potential “tools of hate.”

The document claims these national symbols were sometimes used last summer to “exclude or intimidate,” adding that the “extreme right has tried to turn symbols of pride into tools of hate.”

The 47-page draft, leaked to the Spectator magazine, also highlights how antisemitism has become “normalised in many corners of society” from schools and universities to workplaces and the NHS.

Flying a Union Jack flag is branded a ‘tool of hate’ in Government’s leaked ‘social cohesion’ strategy https://t.co/NePt9iDMJk

— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) March 7, 2026

Under the proposals, titled Protecting What Matters, some £800 million over 10 years would be allocated to 40 areas where social cohesion is “under pressure.”

The strategy is set for a cross-Government rollout next week, but critics are already slamming it as divisive.

Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice blasted the draft, telling the Sun: “Absurdly, this says our national flag is a tool of hate used to intimidate. The whole paper is a divisive nonsense that should be consigned to the bin.”

The leak ties directly into ongoing controversies over national flags, as detailed in our previous coverage where English councils admitted spending tens of thousands to remove “unauthorised” English and Union Jack flags from lampposts.

As we highlighted, leftist activist Pablo O’Hana was caught on video removing flags from a bridge in Manchester, telling a man who placed them: “that’s not what our country is.”

Freedom of Information requests revealed councils spent at least £70,000 on flag removals, with O’Hana suggesting the true cost is far higher as many incorporate it into existing budgets.

Medway Council alone spent nearly £11,600 removing over 700 flags, with Labour councillor Alex Paterson calling it “money well spent” to counter “far-right agitators.”

Paterson added that clearing the streets of British and English flags was essential to “make the community feel safe again,” claiming: “I think at this stage the world is divided into people who know exactly why these flags were put up and those who are still pretending they don’t know why they were put up.”

The flag campaign, known as ‘Operation Raise The Colours,’ emerged amid unrest over sexual offences allegedly committed by illegal immigrants housed in taxpayer-funded hotels.

This grassroots effort, coordinated via a Facebook page with offers of transport and equipment like ladders, saw patriotic activists vowing to keep flags flying despite council interventions.

The Prime Minister previously supported the right to fly St George’s flags, but the leaked documents appear to associate them with far-right protests and immigration tensions.

The strategy also proposes a “special representative” to “champion efforts across the UK to tackle hostility and hatred directed at Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim.”

🔴 An “anti-Muslim hostility tsar” is to be created as part of Labour’s new social cohesion strategy to be unveiled next week

A leaked draft of the strategy cites Islamist extremism as the biggest threat to community cohesion

Find out more ⬇️https://t.co/PVO0VL3C72 pic.twitter.com/znWMqZSPqr

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) March 7, 2026

A new definition of Islamophobia is also expected, with guidance on anti-Muslim hatred.

The Government is expected to announce a new anti-Muslim hostility tsar on Monday as part of a social cohesion plan.

“It is the Muslim vote that continues to preoccupy our bizarre Prime Minister.”@TVKev pic.twitter.com/G1VtiCCwNE

— Talk (@TalkTV) March 6, 2026

Critics warn this could become a backdoor “blasphemy law” stifling free speech, though the Government insists it protects against unacceptable treatment.

A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson declined to address the leak: “We do not comment on leaks.”

This leaked strategy exposes a government more focused on policing national pride than securing borders or protecting native culture. As flags continue to rise, the pushback against globalist erosion of British identity only intensifies—proving that true cohesion comes from shared heritage, not forced suppression.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

He just ordered that some of Russia’s LNG exports to the EU be redirected to Asia, and if the EU doesn’t coerce Zelensky into giving him giving him more of what he wants in Ukraine, then there’d be no reason for him to not cut off Russia’s exports to them entirely for catalyzing a full-blown crisis.

The EU agreed late last year to end Russian LNG imports by 31 December 2026 and pipeline gas imports by 30 September 2027, with the possibility of extending the deadline till 31 October 2027 in case storage levels are below their required filling levels. This was done because “The US Weaponized Russophobic Paranoia & Energy Geopolitics To Capture Control Of Europe”, ergo why it encouraged this decision so as to then monopolize the bloc’s energy market in tandem with its Qatari ally, another LNG superpower.

Everything changed with the Third Gulf War, which began with joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran and has since seen Iran retaliate against all of the Gulf Kingdoms on the basis that the US infrastructure on their territories is being used in attacks against the Islamic Republic. The Strait of Hormuz is now effectively closed and the Gulf Kingdoms are scaling back energy production due to nearly reaching their storage capacity. Importantly, Qatar is also shutting down its gas liquefication, which will take weeks to restart.

It’s for these reasons that an energy crisis is expected which might surpass the one during COVID and even the 1973 Arab oil embargo in terms of its global disruption. With Gulf oil and gas pretty much out of the picture for now, the only realistic recourse for stabilizing the market is to return Russian resources thereto, which contextualizes why the US just temporarily waived sanctions on India’s purchase of Russian oil. The EU might also ramp up its gas imports from Russia ahead of its self-imposed deadlines.

With the impending global energy crisis in mind, Putin announced last week that he ordered his government to look into the possibility of redirecting European energy exports to Asia since they’re more profitable and won’t soon stop importing Russian energy completely like the EU will. Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak then confirmed shortly thereafter that the decision was just made to redirect some (keyword) LNG exports from Europe to friendly countries such as India and China.

The scenario of Russia cutting off gas exports to the EU before the EU cuts off its gas imports from Russia is still on the table, but Putin seems more interested in leveraging this possibility in furtherance of his strategic goals than eschewing such an opportunity just to punish his Western adversaries. To that end, Novak’s confirmation that he decided to redirect some LNG exports from Europe to Asia can be seen as proof of Putin’s intent, but he’s also signaling interest in reconsidering if certain conditions are met.

These are the fulfilment of his goals in Ukraine: Russia’s control over the entirety of the disputed regions, Ukraine’s demilitarization and denazification, the restoration of its constitutional neutrality, and no foreign troops there after the conflict ends. He also wants to begin negotiations on reforming the European security architecture so that it’s less threatening to Russia and is suspected of wanting Zelensky not to run in Ukraine’s next elections. Not all might be achieved, but some likely will, though.

It’s at this moment when the EU is facing an economic crisis caused by the Third Gulf War taking the region’s energy exports offline that the bloc must decide whether it will coerce Zelensky to give Putin at least some of what he wants in exchange for him not redirecting LNG exports from them to Asia. The US might help them with this too so as to maintain the purchasing power of one of its largest markets. If they fail to do so, however, then Putin might finally deal a long-awaited deathblow to the EU economy.

Even a massive military assault on Iran is unlikely to topple the Islamic Republic of Iran and its state system, according to a classified assessment produced by the US intelligence community shortly before the US and Israel launched their current ‘shock and awe-style’ military campaign on Tehran. The Washington Post first reported it, perhaps based on some kind of leak or briefing by an anonymous intelligence official, and calls it—

a sobering assessment as the Trump administration raises the specter of an extended military campaign that officials say has “only just begun.”

The report, compiled by the National Intelligence Council (NIC) roughly a week before the war began, concluded that Iran’s political system is structured to survive even major leadership losses, The Washington Post reports. However, this should really come as no surprise to anyone awake and observant throughout the past two plus decades of America’s ‘nation building’ efforts in the Middle East, from Afghanistan to Iraq to Libya. 

Already, Israel and the US have touted that ‘all’ of Iran’s top leadership has been decimated, and yet clearly the governing system and its military – led specially by the elite IRGC – is not only in control but is still fighting back.

According to the assessment, Tehran has long prepared for such contingencies – and likely there’s an emergency plan now in place in the wake of Ayatollah’s Khamenei’s death.

Intelligence officials say Iran long ago established clear succession protocols designed to maintain continuity of power even if senior leaders are killed. In other words, the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would likely trigger an internal transition process rather than cause the system to collapse – again, something which should be the obvious scenario. 

The intelligence report also poured cold water on the idea that Iran’s opposition could quickly fill any power vacuum. US intelligence analysts assessed that the country’s fragmented opposition movements remain too divided to seize control, regardless of whether Washington pursued limited strikes against leadership targets or a broader assault on state institutions.

Equally unlikely, according to current and former US officials familiar with the analysis, is the prospect of a spontaneous nationwide uprising. We could speculate that this possibility may have had a chance of some degree of success within the opening one or two days of the mass US-Israel bombing campaign, but it clearly didn’t materialize.

Welcome to U.S. elite foreign policy discourse, where you have to stroke your chin and muse thoughtfully about whether it’s a good thing to trigger state collapse and civil war in a nation of 90 million that didn’t pose an imminent threat. https://t.co/EWCLpZrIwF

— Marcus Stanley (@MarcusMStanley) March 7, 2026

On this prospect WaPo quotes Brookings:

“There’s no other force within Iran that can confront the remaining power that the regime has,” Suzanne Maloney, an Iran scholar and vice president of the Brookings Institution, told The Post. “Even if they’re not able to project that power very effectively against their neighbors, they can certainly dominate inside the country.”

The National Intelligence Council synthesizes the analytical work of all 18 US intelligence agencies, and produces classified estimates meant to guide policymakers on major geopolitical risks.

Much of the American public, raised on Hollywood movies, tends to have an overblown and inaccurate understanding of US intelligence agencies like the CIA. While the CIA certainly has a very powerful and secretive covert, operations side (and an even tinier Ground Branch)  – the bulk of its personnel and overseers/top officials are analysts. So there is an overt side and a covert side, with the analyst side tasked with providing the IC and White House with a ‘realistic’ picture of the world, ideally devoid of policy or ideology. Their job is also often to ‘game out’ all worst possible scenarios, given a certain course of action.

The report says the prospect of Iran’s fragmented opposition taking control of the country is “unlikely,” raising doubts about Trump’s declared plan to “clean out” Iran’s leadership structure and install a ruler of his choosing pic.twitter.com/YaHwgoWB9d

— John Hudson (@John_Hudson) March 7, 2026

Meanwhile, the White House has not said whether Trump was briefed on the assessment before approving the operation. But likely such an assessment would have made it into the CIA’s daily briefing for the president, also given reports from last week that the Pentagon also tried to inject some realism in terms of the ‘unknowns’ once Tehran is attacked.

An explosion struck the US Embassy in Oslo, Norway Sunday morning, causing minor damage to the facility and no reported injuries.

The blast, which struck around 1:00 a.m. local time, occurred at the entry to the consular section, according to police spokesperson Mikael Dellemyr in a statement to public broadcaster NRK. 

“We’ve determined that an explosion ​hit the American embassy,” he said. 

BREAKING: Officials say explosion was at the consular entrance to the U.S. Embassy in Oslo, Norway. – NRK pic.twitter.com/BmUfmefCYA

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) March 8, 2026

Police separately said that they don’t have any idea what caused the blast or who was involved.

“The police are in a dialogue with the embassy and there ​are no ​reports of ⁠any injured persons,” they said in a statement. 

China’s latest five-year plan avoids setting ambitious solar targets, signaling rising challenges for the sector after years of explosive growth, according to Bloomberg.

Released during the annual National People’s Congress, the plan does not include a goal for solar installations by 2030. That omission contrasts with clearer commitments elsewhere in the energy mix, including plans to double offshore wind capacity and expand nuclear and pumped-hydro power. Solar receives relatively little attention overall, while policymakers instead emphasize broader transition initiatives such as zero-carbon industrial parks.

The shift follows a record surge in solar development. China’s solar power generation surpassed wind for the first time last year, driven by a flood of inexpensive panels that helped make solar one of the country’s most competitive energy sources.

Yet the rapid expansion is beginning to strain the power system. As solar’s share of the electricity mix rises, grid pressure has increased, leading to more curtailment and weaker returns for developers.

Bloomberg writes that China now faces a different set of challenges for both its power network and industrial economy.

“As renewables reach higher shares in the power mix, the focus naturally shifts toward system integration,” said Muyi Yang, a senior energy analyst at Ember. That means more attention on grid expansion, system flexibility, energy storage and other ways to balance intermittent power, including pumped hydro. Expanding clean power across industry also demands deeper structural changes, since existing systems were largely built around fossil fuels. “That’s where you start to see more explicit policy attention and new initiatives emerging like the zero-carbon industrial park initiative,” Yang said.

Meanwhile, market conditions in the solar supply chain remain weak. According to the China Silicon Industry Association, polysilicon prices in China dropped between 6.2% and 12.9% in the week through Wednesday as demand stayed soft after the Lunar New Year holiday and inventories remained elevated. Wafer prices also slipped between 2.5% and 2.9%, while module prices held steady at 0.71–0.75 yuan per watt and cell prices remained unchanged at 0.41–0.45 yuan per watt.

Grid utilization data also points to mounting strain. Solar power use edged down to 94.3% in January from 94.4% a year earlier and 94.6% in December, according to the National New Energy Consumption Monitoring and Early Warning Center.

At the same time, policymakers are beginning to address the sector’s next phase of development. China plans to strengthen its capacity to recycle aging solar modules, setting a target to process 250,000 tons by 2027 as large volumes of older equipment approach retirement. At the National People’s Congress, Zhong Baoshen, chairman and president of LONGi Green Energy Technology, also proposed creating a financing supervision system for the solar industry and restricting funding for companies that fail to meet regulatory requirements.

Forecasts referenced by the China Photovoltaic Industry Association suggest the sector’s breakneck expansion may slow by 2026 as grid constraints and weaker economics begin to bite.

Via The Cradle

At least eight Israeli soldiers were injured by Hezbollah rockets near the border with southern Lebanon on Friday, including the son of Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, according to Israeli media. The Lebanese resistance targeted Israeli troop gatherings on Friday. A rocket struck a group of soldiers, wounding eight, five of whom are in serious condition, according to Israel’s military.

The Givati Brigade soldiers were transported to the hospital for treatment. Smotrich’s office released a statement saying his son was among the wounded troops. The attack comes a day after Smotrich vowed that Israel would make Beirut “look like Khan Yunis.”

Hezbollah drone and rocket attacks on Israeli positions have been ongoing, including soldiers inside Lebanon and forces across the border. 

“The Mujahideen of the Islamic Resistance targeted a position where soldiers of the Israeli enemy army were entrenched in the Blat al-Mustaqbal area in southern Lebanon with a guided missile… and achieved a direct hit,” Hezbollah announced early Friday evening. 

It also announced drone attacks on Kiryat Shmona, a rocket attack on a base in Safad, and around a dozen other operations. 

Israel has started a ground invasion of Lebanon after the pro-Tehran resistance reopened the front, following the beginning of the war of aggression against Iran.

Occupation troops have crossed the border into the country, while other forces are positioned in locations that the Israeli army occupied inside Lebanon after the ceasefire deal in 2024. 

Since the ground war began, Hebrew media have reported several “difficult security incidents” which are under heavy censorship. 

An Israeli army officer was wounded by Hezbollah resistance fighters on March 5, the Israeli military announced in an official statement. 

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s son was sent off to the northern front with Hezbollah and a day after was wounded:

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s son lasted one day in Lebanon before getting injured, according to Israeli media. pic.twitter.com/mifpnHiLiu

— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) March 6, 2026

The battles coincided with continued indiscriminate bombing by Israel across south Lebanon, the east, and the capital, Beirut. Over 200 Lebanese have been killed by Israel since March 2.

According to a report by Al Jadeed TV, France has proposed an initiative for an end to the war in Lebanon in exchange for “a full surrender of Hezbollah.”

Hezbollah is “rejecting that any party negotiates on its behalf over ending the war, stressing that when the negotiations course matures, it will be the first negotiator, seeing as it considers the previous agreement to be unideal.”

The Israeli army has attacked southern Lebanon almost every day since the November 2024 so-called ceasefire, killing hundreds of people. Hezbollah or possibly other groups began to launch sporadic missiles into northern Israel soon after the start of the Iran war this week.

Sigh. It’s all so exhausting. Not all of New York’s wealthiest residents are sounding alarms over Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s plan to raise taxes on high earners. In fact, a small group of millionaires says the backlash is a bit over the top, according to Bloomberg.

Members of the Patriotic Millionaires — including filmmaker Abigail Disney, granddaughter of Roy O. Disney of The Walt Disney Company — argue the rich can easily afford to contribute more if it helps fund things like schools, transit and child care.

“I’ve gotten tax cut after tax cut after tax cut. And I never needed any of them,” Disney said, backing Mamdani’s proposed 2-percentage-point income-tax surcharge on millionaires. “All these things have fallen out from under the middle class — an education system that works, public transportation, infrastructure, health care.”

Bloomberg writes that the mayor has floated several ways to boost city revenue, including higher income taxes for people earning more than $1 million and an increase in the top corporate tax rate. Critics, including hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman, say the approach risks driving wealthy residents and companies to lower-tax states like Florida or Texas — a concern echoed by Kathy Hochul and business groups.

Supporters counter that the idea of a billionaire stampede out of Manhattan is exaggerated. “I’m certainly not going to move because of higher taxes. That’s ridiculous,” said Morris Pearl, a former executive at BlackRock. “I live where I want to live, and so do most rich people.”

New York isn’t short on potential taxpayers. Nearly 35,000 city residents earned at least $1 million in 2023, and the top 1% already generate roughly two-fifths of the city’s income-tax revenue, according to the New York City Independent Budget Office. For some wealthy advocates, that just proves the point: the people with the deepest pockets can afford to keep the city running.

Pearl also notes how easily the ultra-wealthy can sidestep income taxes altogether. “When you’re already rich, you don’t need income,” he said. “If you don’t have income, you don’t pay income taxes.”