Summary:

• Iran Threatens Musk’s Starlink Ground Bases In Gulf Area Ahead Of IPO  

• Massive SpaceX IPO Demand Coming From Gulf Sovereign Wealth Funds

IranIntlbrk is the X handle for Iran International’s breaking-news account and cites Tehran-aligned Fars News Agency, stating that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has placed the economic interests of Elon Musk in West Asia, including Arab countries and Israel, under consideration on a new target list.

IranIntlbrk continued:

1. Fars News Agency reported that this action is under consideration following claims by the IRGC-affiliated outlet that the U.S. and Israeli militaries’ use of infrastructure managed by Elon Musk, including Starlink, has been proven.

2. A media outlet affiliated with the IRGC wrote that Starlink’s ground stations in Israel, Qatar, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman, alongside SpaceX shareholders including the infrastructure of the two companies “Al-Fazabi” and “Exchange,” are among the new targets of the Islamic Republic.

The IRGC’s threat against Musk’s Starlink ground stations (Starlink Gateways) across the region should come as no surprise. IRGC forces have already demonstrated a willingness to strike Gulf data centers, including the reported Shahed drone attacks on two AWS data centers in the UAE.

The timing of the IRGC’s threat against Musk is notable. It comes one day ahead of the SpaceX IPO, suggesting Tehran is trying to remain relevant in the news cycle with another round of big-bad warnings aimed at U.S. tech giants, Gulf allies, and critical communications infrastructure.

Starlink Service Map

On Wednesday, we reported that massive demand for the SpaceX IPO was coming from Gulf sovereign wealth funds.

Also today, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wrote on X, “The Iranian regime will lose the zero-sum game it is playing. Any damage it inflicts on our allies in the Gulf will be paid for with funds extracted from Iranian accounts.”

Massive SpaceX IPO Demand Coming From Gulf Sovereign Wealth Funds 

One week ago, SpaceX kicked off its institutional roadshow, headlined by JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, who hosted a nationwide “live interactive discussion” with private wealth clients.

The latest signal of investor demand comes from the Gulf, where massive sovereign wealth funds are reportedly seeking allocations in the IPO ahead of its expected Friday debut, according to Bloomberg News.

The report says Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund and Kuwait Investment Authority have each placed orders for the IPO worth $1 billion to $5 billion, while the Qatar Investment Authority is also expected to make a significant commitment.

The report continued:

Entities based in the region are already prominent shareholders in Elon Musk’s rocket, satellite and AI firm, and many are sitting on large paper gains based on the billionaire’s targeted valuation of $1.8 trillion, the people said. It wasn’t immediately clear how much of the planned outlay is intended to prevent dilution of existing stakes after SpaceX’s listing.

The interest from the Gulf is part of a broader rush into the deal from global institutional investors, whose orders have exceeded the number of shares on offer. Some have bid for $10 billion or more of stock, Bloomberg News has reported, though the eventual allocations might be smaller.

In a separate report, Reuters says the IPO is three-and-a-half to four times oversubscribed, highlighting massive institutional demand for what is shaping up to be the largest listing on record and a defining moment for the space economy.

Elon Musk has joined several Zoom meetings with potential investors, while SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell and CFO Bret Johnsen were expected to meet with roughly 300 institutional investors at a Morgan Stanley lunch in Manhattan.

Goldman Sachs was selected as the lead bank for the IPO, alongside Morgan Stanley. JPMorgan, Bank of America, and Citigroup are also among the 23 banks working on the deal, offering a staggering $75 billion by selling about 555.6 million shares. The planned IPO price is about $135 per share.

Why SpaceX’s IPO Is drawing record investor demand…

We offered readers a complete deep dive into the mechanics of the SpaceX offering and how to trade the world’s biggest IPO (read the report). SpaceX’s underwriters have shut off investor access to the offering in China and Hong Kong, primarily due to regulatory and compliance concerns.

However, there is a concerted effort by unhinged leftist lawmakers (such as Elizabeth Warren) and left-wing pension funds to delay or deny the SpaceX IPO, mainly for political brownie points. They appear to view the sudden new wealth generated for Elon Musk (and his employees and investors) as absolutely horrifying…

NEW: Elizabeth Warren is calling for the SEC to delay the mega SpaceX IPO.

Warren cites concerns about “questionable valuation,” governance structure & mandatory arbitration pic.twitter.com/4mQqzTtYRs

— Matt Egan (@MattEganCNN) June 10, 2026

… given that Musk is pro-humanity and seeks to liberate the world’s minds from toxic progressive causes.

Markets expect the ECB to hike by 25bps, the first rate hike since 2023, but do not look for explicit guidance on the path ahead, with the Council likely pledging in the statement to set monetary policy in a data-dependent and meeting-by-meeting fashion. Lagarde is likely to highlight that tightening is appropriate, for example, by repeating that the energy shock requires “some measured adjustment” in the policy stance. Goldman does not expect her to provide any specific guidance on next steps but look for her to reiterate that the Council wants to see more data and does not need to rush

SUMMARY (courtesy of Newsquawk)

• The ECB is expected to hike by 25bps, taking the Deposit Rate to 2.25%. Justified by the assessment that the ECB is past the March baseline and is closer to the adverse scenario.
• Alongside this, inflation forecasts will likely be upgraded and growth downgraded across 2026. The cut off date will have influence on the 2026 inflation view, with a later date likely to see less hawkish projections. For growth, any signs of or commentary around a technical recession being possible.
• Guidance from the statement will be non-commital with the ECB to perhaps stress a vigilant approach to policymaking, which could be interpreted as a hawkish-nod. Lagarde may be somewhat more explicit vs the statement, in an attempt to stop inflation expectations from becoming unanchored.

OVERVIEW: Recent developments place the ECB somewhere between the baseline and adverse scenarios outlined in March. An assessment that chimes with expectations for a 25bps hike and supports keeping options open for the remainder of the year. However, the balancing act between growth and inflation means that pre-committing to further tightening is not necessary at this point. Instead the ECB, whether via the statement and/or President Lagarde, will likely emphasize that it will be vigilant, or words to that effect, in safeguarding against price pressures in the EZ while acknowledging the deteriorating growth environment.

EUR/USD and the German 10yr yield approach the meeting around 1.1550 and 3.05% respectively. The market basecase, of a 25bps hike, elevated inflation forecasts and downgraded growth forecasts alongside no firm commitment to further tightening, would likely see a modest hawkish reaction in the above. If the ECB is more direct and places less emphasis on growth and more on inflation, alongside opening the door more explicitly to further tightening, ING looks for EUR/USD and the 10yr yield to rise to 1.1650 and 3.10%; levels we last traded at on the 2nd of June and 21st of May respectively. A more hawkish outcome, particularly a statement/press conference that signals the start of a tightening cycle, could see 1.1700 and 3.15%.

HAWKISH RISK: The projections could show a bigger core inflation overshoot in 2027, with greater concern around the inflation outlook in the monetary policy statement and a clearer signal that additional tightening is coming. For example, the Council could note in the statement that it judges it appropriate to “begin” tightening monetary policy (hinting at a process rather than a one-time adjustment) and Lagarde could open up July by emphasizing that the Council will have important data on second-round effects by then (provided by its corporate telephone, wage and inflation expectations surveys).  

DOVISH RISK: The Council could return to a two-sided assessment of the risks around inflation, show an inflation undershoot in 2028 (more similar to the March adverse scenario) and emphasize patience in the press conference (e.g., by stressing that it will receive a lot more data by the September meeting). 

PREVIOUS MEETING: In April, the ECB held the Deposit Rate at 2.00% as expected. The statement emphasized that the US is well positioned to navigate the current period of uncertainty, and as such they were not pre-committing to a particular rate path, sticking to a data-dependent and meeting-by-meeting approach. No new forecasts in April, but the commentary emphasised that upside inflation risks had “intensified”, while longer-term expectations remained “well anchored”. On the growth side, downside risk had “intensified”. The statement sparked a mild dovish reaction, as outside calls for a more hawkish shift were unwound. The subsequent press conference saw President Lagarde unveil that the ECB debated a rate hike, but the decision to hold rates was unanimous. A press conference that sparked a hawkish reaction in European assets. The hawkish skew was added to by subsequent sources, suggesting that a June hike was seen as very likely, Reuters reported.

PRICES: Mayʼs inflation data had a headline rate of 3.2%, ticking up from the 3.0% in April. Pertinently, the ECBʼs HICP Y/Y forecast for 2026 is 2.6% in the baseline, 3.5% in the adverse and 4.4% in the severe scenario. As such, the May print took the bloc further away from the baseline and towards the adverse projection, a point that factors firmly in favour of tightening monetary policy; though the gap to the severe scenario means a 50bps move or pre-committing to tightening post-June are not warranted yet. Within the May series, the internals saw further upside in the energy component and pertinently a jump in Services, to 3.5% from 3.0%. Continuing with May, the Final S&P PMIs showed price pressures intensifying “to their most worrying for over three years, hinting at inflation potentially running close to 4% in the coming months.”. A view that, if shared among policy setters, could see some in favour of more explicit guidance than the statement and/or Lagarde are likely to give. From the ECB itself, the latest Consumer Expectations Survey for April (released in June) vs March, showed one- and five-year consumer expectations remain the same at 4.0% and 2.4% respectively. While the three-year view moderated to 2.9% (prev. 3.0%). Figures that are all above the 2% long-term target, however, the unchanged view shows that expectations were not unanchored in April and, while somewhat dated, provides policymakers with further scope to take an “insurance” hike, given the clear price pressures, but not commit to anything further at this stage.

For the new macroeconomic projections, the above points to an upgrade of at the very least the baseline view, but likely also one or possibly both of the alternative scenarios. Specifically, Nordea expects the 2026 baseline to lift to 3.0% (prev. 2.6%). One point of nuance in the forecasts, particularly for prices, is the cutoff date. In March, the ECB used an exceptionally late cut-off date and a very small date range for the assessment. The above is based on that being repeated and an early June cut-off being used. If not, then the technical assumptions around energy will be significantly higher and as such the near-term inflation view would be more hawkish vs a later cut-off.

ECONOMY: Q1 GDP for the EZ stood at -0.2% Q/Q, after being subject to a marked downward revision in the 3rd estimate from 0.15%. However, some of this stems from a -12.1% print from Ireland, hit by the unwind of tariff and pharmaceutical related activity in the comparison. A more timely indication courtesy of the S&P PMI for May points to another -0.2% Q/Q print in Q2, bar any significant shift in June; if realised in the hard data, that would see the EZ enter a technical recession. Furthermore, the PMI showed a pick up in labour market losses. Unemployment data from member nations remains weak, with the EZ figure in April ticking up to 6.3% (prev. 6.2%). The most timely data available at the time of writing is the German GfK for June, which was bleak at -29.8 though it did improve slightly from -33.3 despite NIM outlining that the “negative impact of the conflict in the Middle East remains largely unchanged…”.

For the new macroeconomic projections, the data is indicative of a downgrade. In March, the 2026 baseline, adverse and severe scenarios were 0.9%, 0.6% and 0.4% respectively. Nordea looks for the 2026 baseline to be downgraded to 0.7%. Taking the ECB closer but not to the adverse scenario from March, and as such chimes with the narrative for an insurance hike and while it does not aid the argument for further 2026 tightening, it does not shut the door to a post-June move.

COMMENTARY: Overall, commentary chimes with consensus for a 25bps hike in June, given recent economic developments, but that it is too soon to commit to any tightening thereafter. Recently, Schnabel (26th May) outlined that prices are between the baseline and the adverse scenario, adding that “in terms of persistence, we have actually moved beyond the adverse scenario, which assumed a rapid normalisation of oil prices.”. Prior to that, on the 26th of May, Schnabel said that they should hike in June irrespective of the peace proposal. Simkus (29th May) described a near term move as an insurance hike, but also downplayed the impact of even 50bps of tightening over 2026, noting that the timing for a second move is less clear. In terms of forward guidance, Lane (26th May) remarked that they will not be pre-commiting to a particular path after June.

TRADES: Goldman likes to receive July/September meeting switch at ~18bps (72% chance). The bank thinks that you can have both a (near term) hawkish path to no hike in September, as well as a dovish path. The (near term) hawkish path would involve no near-term resolution on Iran, with the SOH continuing to be closed by the time of the July meeting, leading to a second ECB hike in July. Subsequently, you could then either have a resolution between July and September, or signs of further economic weakness and limited wage pass through, meaning that, by the time of the September meeting, and with policy rates at the upper end of neutral, the ECB decides to skip a rate hike at the September meeting. The dovish path is one of a near term resolution and a glut of oil from ships stuck in SOH hitting the market, pushing down energy prices and inflation and inflation expectations. In this scenario, it is very feasible, that the ECB will not hike rates again after the June meeting. 

THOUGHTS FROM GOLDMAN’S TRADING DESK:

Jari Stehn (Head of European Economics): We expect the ECB to hike by 25bp but do not look for explicit guidance on the path ahead, with the Council likely pledging in the statement to set monetary policy in a data-dependent and meeting-by-meeting fashion. Lagarde is likely to highlight that tightening is appropriate, for example, by repeating that the energy shock requires “some measured adjustment” in the policy stance. We do not expect her to provide any specific guidance on next steps but look for her to reiterate that the Council wants to see more data and does not need to rush. 

George Cole (Head of European Rates Strategy): Our bias is for terminal rate pricing lower and flatter curve. Key for today’s meeting will be the signal on July, currently priced not far off 50/50. If the message is that July is more of a tail outcome then market can shift towards pricing one and done, particularly given leak lower in energy prices on view that SoH is more impaired than fully shut with increasingly more oil transiting (though obviously a lot of headline risks with waR). Ultimately September is a long way off with ample time for resolution and/or the lower growth impacts of the war to come through. Specifically we will be watching: 

1. Core inflation forecasts and whether they show persistence – GS econ are 2.5% both for 26/27; would be dovish if lower/inverts 
2. Whether Lagarde emphasizes that tomorrow’s move buys time to watch the data and that currently little signs of 2nd round effects in the labour market 

Jan Scheffel (Global Co-Head of Short Term Macro Trading): Given the high level of uncertainty we expect the ECB to keep full optionality on the future policy rate path, neither pre-committing or ruling out a move at the July meeting. We would expect Lagarde to use communication along the line of: “In assessing the timing and extend of further policy adjustments, the governing council will take a data-dependant, meeting by meeting, approach. We are not pre-committed to any policy path.” 

Overnight, there did not appear to be any new major exchanges of fire after Iran launched retaliatory strikes on US bases in Kuwait, Bahrain and Jordan – following the US bombing of some dozens of targets in Iran earlier, in the wake of the downing of a US Apache attack helicopter in the Hormuz area earlier this week.

But since then, Iran has announced it is closing the Strait of Hormuz – or rather seeking to tighten its grip with the likelihood of more aggressive attacks on international and ‘unauthorized’ tankers to come. Iran had also struck US bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, and Jordan – according to its statements as well as emerging open source material.

The most important new statement to come out of Tehran is the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s charge that the US attacks “rendered the ceasefire dated April 8, 2026 effectively meaningless” and that the US will be held responsible for the “consequences”. The formal statement also urged regional Arab stated to not allow American forces to use their territories.

Intercepted Iranian attack drones fell on residential areas in Bahrain’s Hamad City and Manama this morning, damaging several buildings. pic.twitter.com/8sPowbuPH2

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 11, 2026

It is day 104 of the enduring conflict, with active war having newly erupted again, and so we are seeing airspace closures over the region once again, with Kuwait confirming flight diversions amid a temporary airspace closure.

Aerial alerts have also been issued for Jordan. 

A slew of new videos have emerged showing missile intercepts, with US Patriot batteries active, over areas from Kuwait to Bahrain to Jordan – however, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) interestingly continues to be sparred from Iran’s wrath and retaliation.

Footage of an engagement between an American PATRIOT SAM battery and incoming Iranian medium-range ballistic missiles over Jordan this morning. pic.twitter.com/nCT7YhSTeD

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 11, 2026

As for the latest of what’s confirmed in the wake of the prior day’s major US attacks on Iran, which involved over 40 Tomahawk missiles fired, Al Jazeera has the following summary and review of the situation:

• US strikes on Iran: US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed that Washington was launching strikes on “key facilities” in Iran, saying the attacks were part of attempts to secure a permanent ceasefire. Speaking outside CENTCOM headquarters in Tampa, Florida, Hegseth said President Donald Trump had ordered Iran to be hit “hard” and warned the strikes could continue for a second consecutive night if necessary.
• Strait of Hormuz closed: In response to the latest attacks, Iran’s top military command announced the complete closure of the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical oil transit routes. Officials warned all vessels to stay away from the strategic waterway, saying any ships attempting to pass through could come under attack.
• Water services restored: Authorities in Iran’s Hormozgan province said water supplies had been restored to affected communities in Sirik county less than 12 hours after US strikes damaged infrastructure. Iranian media reported that two concrete water storage reservoirs were hit in the attacks. A New York Times analysis suggested the tanks may have been struck with precision-guided munitions, raising concerns as international humanitarian law considers civilian water infrastructure a protected site.
• Tehran reacts to renewed fighting: Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Mohamed Vall said many Iranians had been expecting another US attack despite renewed talk of negotiations. “They have been waiting and expecting a surprise American attack,” Vall said, adding that Tehran retaliated by striking US bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, according to military commanders. The latest exchanges mark another night of direct confrontation after both sides had suggested the previous round of attacks had come to an end.

Below: Iran releases video showing this its latest missile launches targeting US bases in the Middle East:

Iran releases video showing this morning’s missile launches targeting U.S. bases in the Middle East. pic.twitter.com/fXR1ervGad

— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 11, 2026

President Trump is again trying his hand at forcing Iran to negotiate and capitulate through bombing, most recently warning in a statement to Fox News that if Iran does not accept a US deal, it would come under American fire power once again “tomorrow night” — so the clock is ticking Thursday, apparently. 

While Trump claimed the Iranians had contacted Washington, urging a halt to the attacks, Tehran leadership has rejected that this actually happened. The whole situation is somewhat of a return to the same stalemated reality of the opening days and weeks of Operation Epic Fury.

This is precisely what he thought the first few days would do https://t.co/9sFgy6qS3G

— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) June 11, 2026

In the Gulf of Oman, US forces have reportedly disabled another oil tanker charged with ‘violating the blockade’ put into place by the US Navy. This marks the third commercial vessel disabled by American forces this week. According to a fresh CENTCOM description of the action:

U.S. forces disabled an oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman at 11:20 p.m. ET on June 10 after the vessel violated the blockade against Iran by attempting to transport Iranian oil, marking the third commercial ship disabled by American forces this week.

U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) acted against Guinea-Bissau flagged M/T Jalveer as it attempted to transport oil from Iran through the Gulf of Oman. A U.S. aircraft fired two Hellfire missiles into the ship’s engine room after the crew repeatedly failed to comply with directions from U.S. forces.

Earlier this week, U.S. aircraft disabled Palau-flagged vessels M/T Marivex and M/T Settebello on Monday and Tuesday, respectively. Marivex violated the blockade by attempting to sail to an Iranian port and Settebello attempted to transport Iranian oil.

In total: U.S. forces have disabled 9 non-compliant vessels since initiating the blockade of Iran’s ports on April 13.

The MT Jalveer, an Indian-crewed commercial vessel, suffered damage near Oman, India’s Foreign Ministry said. A total of three Indian vessels were attacked by the U.S. Navy, two of which are OFAC-sanctioned, and one falling under the non-compliant category. pic.twitter.com/g8gvq2EqGw

— Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) June 11, 2026

Bloomberg reports early Thursday:

Qatar negotiators depart Tehran after talks on US, Iran: diplomat to AFP

Some regional media, such as Al Arabiya, are reporting that negotiations between Tehran and Washington are ongoing (likely only indirectly, if at all) – though there hasn’t been official confirmation of this from the Islamic Republic side at all. Instead, they are calling even the extended ceasefire itself ‘meaningless’.

According to the latest communication, Iran’s Defense Ministry says the country will not back down in the face of threats or pressure, with the national armed forces remaining on high alert, ready to inflict retaliation and punishment.

Authored by Micah Zimmerman via BitcoinMagazine.com,

Strategy Inc. CEO Phong Le somewhat pushed back Tuesday against the wave of criticism that followed the company’s first Bitcoin sale since 2022, telling CNBC’s Power Lunch that the move was a deliberate, limited exercise designed to signal operational flexibility — not a philosophical reversal.

“We wanted to inoculate the market and we wanted to test our processes,” Le said in what the network described as a first-time interview. “We learned that everything works.”

Between May 26 and May 31, Strategy sold 32 Bitcoin for approximately $2.5 million at an average price of $77,135 per coin — a transaction that, despite representing just 0.004% of the company’s total holdings, set off an outsized market reaction and reignited debate over whether Michael Saylor’s famous “never sell” doctrine was being abandoned.

BITCOIN’S FOUR-YEAR CYCLE IS STILL IN PLAY

Strategy CEO Phong Le however says the drawdowns are “much more” than just where we’re at in the four-year cycle.

Inflation, rates, wars, and regulatory clarity are all shaping $BTC‘s next move. pic.twitter.com/TZANZZaQIF

— CryptosRus (@CryptosR_Us) June 10, 2026

Le was careful to frame the disposal in terms of balance sheet management rather than conviction. He cited three reasons for the sale: establishing that Strategy can sell when necessary, confirming that internal systems for executing Bitcoin disposals are fully operational, and creating opportunities to capture tax losses on Bitcoin acquired at lower cost basis — the company has purchased BTC at prices ranging from $10,000 to $125,000 per coin.

Critically, he said the sale was not driven by financial distress.

“We did not need to sell our Bitcoin to satisfy our dividends,” Le said. “We’re able to do that through other capital-raising activities.”

Proceeds from the sale were directed toward distributions on the company’s STRC perpetual preferred stock.

Le also pointed out that Strategy remained a net buyer: on balance, the company purchased approximately 1,500 Bitcoin over the same period it sold the 32 coins.

The most pointed exchange came when the host pressed Le on the backlash from investors who believed Strategy had pledged never to liquidate its Bitcoin reserves. Le acknowledged the frustration but was unapologetic.

“We have a set of constituents that we have to be able to answer to,” he said, listing common stockholders, preferred shareholders, debt holders, and Bitcoin holders. “When it makes sense for our common stockholders for us to sell our Bitcoin, we will.”

Le suggested the loudest critics were retail investors and “crypto anarchists” ideologically committed to permanent hodling — not the institutional shareholders the company interacts with directly.

“Our institutional shareholders that we talked to don’t seem to be unnerved by it,” he said.

This was not Strategy’s first Bitcoin disposal. In December 2022, the company sold 704 BTC at $16,776 per coin and repurchased 810 BTC two days later — a tax-loss harvesting maneuver that exploited the lack of a crypto wash-sale rule.

Jeffrey’s chief market strategist David Zervos, who joined Le on set, asked about the macro picture around Bitcoin, noting weakness across traditional safe-haven assets. Le acknowledged the broader headwinds, citing three macro forces pressuring Bitcoin: uncertainty around the Federal Reserve’s interest rate path, two ongoing global wars, and a lack of regulatory clarity from Congress on pending crypto legislation.

Still, Le remained bullish on Bitcoin’s long-term thesis. 

“I do think Bitcoin is a hedge against inflation. I think Bitcoin is a hedge against big government,” he said, adding that the current environment — potentially a cyclical drawdown — mirrors the roughly 75% pullback seen in May 2022, four years ago.

Bitcoin price and Strategy shares under pressure

The market, for now, is less sanguine. Bitcoin was trading around $61,600 on June 10, 2026 — down more than 40% from its all-time high of $126,198 reached in October 2025. The sell-off deepened after the Strategy announcement coincided with record spot ETF outflows estimated between $2.8 billion and $3.5 billion, triggering $1.8 billion in forced liquidations in a single day.

MSTR shares have been caught in the same downdraft, trading near $117–$127 as of this week — down roughly 67% from their 52-week high of $457.

Strategy has since resumed buying, acquiring 1,550 BTC at an average price of $65,332 between June 1 and June 7 in a move analysts characterized as an effort to restore market confidence. 

As of late May, the company held 845,256 Bitcoin at a total cost basis of approximately $63.97 billion.

Alcoa shares in New York were hammered the most in over a year on Wednesday after CFO Molly Beerman warned investors that the company’s alumina segment faces heavy losses from the energy shock and ongoing disruption at the Hormuz maritime chokepoint.

Beerman was blunt with investors while giving a presentation at the Wells Fargo Industrials & Materials Conference.

She said, “Our alumina segment is very pressured right now,” adding, “The segment as a whole will be underwater.”

Beerman said the unprofitability in the alumina segment stems from a toxic cocktail of soaring energy costs, supply disruptions in the Gulf region, and LNG disruptions in Western Australia following Cyclone Narelle.

Alcoa’s alumina refineries are heavily exposed because they rely on fuel and electricity, and typically ship material to aluminum smelters in the Persian Gulf.

Alcoa’s alumina refineries are mainly in Western Australia, Brazil, and Spain. None are located in the Gulf region.

What’s important is that the company’s refining assets are outside the Gulf, but its alumina cargoes feed Gulf smelters, making the business exposed to ongoing Hormuz shipping disruption and Gulf energy shocks.

Alcoa expects 2026 Alumina segment production of 9.7-9.9 million metric tons and shipments of 11.8-12.0 million metric tons.

Beerman’s warning sent shares tumbling 9.5% in New York on Wednesday, marking the largest one-day drop in 14 months. Shares were up 2% in premarket trading, clawing back some of yesterday’s losses.

Year-to-date, the stock is up 23.4% and is nearing its 2022 highs.

According to Bloomberg data, Wall Street analysts are mostly bullish on AA. 

We have cited several institutional metal desks, including Mercuria, Goldman, and JPMorgan, all of which see the Gulf energy shock producing a supply shock in the aluminum market. This has sent prices back to 2022 highs.

Mercuria commodities analyst Nick Snowdon recently told Reuters on the sidelines of the Financial Times Commodities Global Summit in Lausanne, Switzerland, that “The scale of the supply shock we’re seeing in the aluminum market is probably the largest single supply shock a base metals market has suffered in the post-2000 era.”

Snowdon then told the outlet, “We are already in a ‘black swan’ event. No one could have foreseen something on this scale.”

Latest reporting:

• Aluminum Supply Crisis Is About To Get Worse
• Aluminum Bull Case Gains Traction As Output Shrinks

Alcoa recently warned investors that the energy shock would weigh on second-quarter earnings.

The European Union, which has been starved for cheap energy since the start of the Ukraine war, is betting that the future of its energy system lies under the North African sun. On Tuesday, the European Commission pledged €5 billion of EU money to renewables projects in North Africa and the Middle East, which could feed electricity back into Europe’s grid, Politico reported.

The dream is that solar panels in the sun-soaked Sahara Desert and wind turbines along the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean generate electricity that is then sent through high-voltage transmission lines under the sea and into Europe’s grid. While visionary, the probability of this happening in the next decade is slim, meanwhile the bill for Europe – which is even more cash-strapped than it is energy-strapped – would be astronomic.

That electricity would replace imported fossil fuels, helping Europe meet its ambitious electrification and climate targets.

The Commissions hopes the EU funding will lure private money to co-invest, mobilizing up to €25 billion of investment in solar, wind, hydrogen, electricity grids and other clean technologies by 2035.

“The EU’s bill for fossil fuel imports has increased by over €47 billion in the past 100 days, but not a single molecule of energy in addition,” EU energy chief Dan Jørgensen said during a press conference announcing the new initiative on Tuesday.

By 2035, the Commission expects the initiative to support the development of at least 15 gigawatts of new renewable-energy capacity, create more than 100,000 jobs and strengthen electricity interconnections across the Mediterranean. It wasn’t clear if the Commission also factored in the astronomic costs such a project would require, or where it would get the funds.

The launch of the initiative, known as T-MED, comes as Europe faces renewed volatility in global energy markets because of the war in Iran. Jørgensen linked the initiative directly to the current crisis, arguing that recent events have once again exposed the risks of relying on fossil fuels.

“Our energy security must be based on electrified energy systems that are based on clean energy, modern grids and increased connectivity,” he said.

According to Brussels, North Africa and the Middle East holds around 2,300 gigawatts of renewable-energy potential,  more than twice the EU’s current installed capacity. Solar and wind power can be produced 30 to 40 percent more cheaply than in Europe, the Commission estimates.

“Our objective is simply to turn potential into projects, projects into investments and investments into jobs and growth,” said Mediterranean Commissioner Dubravka Šuica during the launch on Tuesday.

Yet the scale of the challenge remains enormous. By the Commission’s own estimates the region will require well over €100 billion in investment by the end of the decade to fully exploit its renewable-energy potential. Officials acknowledged Tuesday that the €25 billion target is only a starting point. Meanwhile, as Rabo’s Michael Every notes, such a project would require both massive capital as well as Africa not wanting that power for its own economy, not to mention an EU ability to physically protect such installations in a region plagued by Islamist attacks and Russian influence in places. “That could therefore cost more than €100bn.”

The Commission hopes a new T-MED investment platform, due to become operational in September, will help bridge that gap by bringing together governments, development banks, project developers and private investors. At the same time, Brussels plans to push partner countries to simplify permitting procedures, improve grid access and strengthen regulatory frameworks in order to make projects more attractive to investors, which of course will be critical since the project would have to be funded with new debt. Lots of debt.

The initiative resembles a strategy Europe has pursued before. More than a decade ago, the Desertec project sought to harness North African solar power and export it to Europe. Despite early enthusiasm, the project ultimately ended up as a – pardon the pun – flaming disaster amid political uncertainty, financing challenges and concerns over the cost of new infrastructure.

Similar projects in other parts of the world have also collapsed: the Sun Cable project, for example, which promised to power Singapore with Australian sunlight via what would have been the longest undersea power cable in the world, was a flop.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The European Union recently announced the first recipients of its new European Order of Merit, the organization’s highest award. The headliner was Angela Merkel, former Federal Chancellor of Germany, who indeed personifies the European Union for both her fans and her critics. For many years, some of us have criticized Merkel as one of the leading forces behind European censorship efforts that have eviscerated the “Indispensable Right.” 

Not surprisingly, Merkel called for more censorship and attacks on free speech to a thrilled audience of EU bureaucrats and globalists.

In one of the most ironic moments, Merkel declared, “Europe was not handed to us. It was built treaty by treaty, crisis by crisis and by people who chose solidarity over division and cooperation over self-interest.” Indeed, it was not handed to them.

As I discuss in my new book, “Rage and the Republic, the EU was formed by design to incrementally get citizens in Europe to give up their national identities and rights:

The EEC worked to remove barriers to trade and coordinate national regulations to achieve greater uniformity. As nations conformed to such transnational standards, the final step toward transnational governance became less of a conceptual barrier for citizens, particularly younger citizens…

…The evolution of the EU is a cautionary tale. It began with assurances of marginal coordinating bodies and policies over areas like nuclear power and scientific research. Through this planned incrementalism, each insular move was defended on its narrow purpose while dismissing objections as nationalistic or conspiratorial. That planned incrementalism worked brilliantly in getting citizens to accept transnational governance.

Merkel was critical in that effort. She is blamed for opening the borders to a flood of undocumented immigrants that has caused rising violence and protests throughout Europe. However, her crowning jewel was the crackdown on free speech. She can honestly claim that Germans (and Europeans as a whole) have fewer rights after her public service. She increased the power of government, stripped away free speech rights, and reduced national identities without firing a shot.

Merkel consistently opposed free speech, building a censorship system that gave the government ever greater control over speech. Her decision to first apologize to authoritarian Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan for a satirical poem and then approve the prosecution of the comedian is a shocking and chilling disgrace. Now, she is throwing her support behind a crackdown on “hate speech” on social media like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube — radically expanding the already broad scope of government regulation of speech.

Merkel declared, “I support efforts by Justice Minister Heiko Maas and Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere to address hate speech, hate commentaries, devastating things that are incompatible with human dignity, and to do everything to prohibit it because it contradicts our values.”

Merkel was a driving force in using such subjective standards as “compatibility with human dignity” as a foundation for government-imposed speech controls.

Merkel also threatened social media companies, warning they would face a government crackdown if they failed to get rid of “fake news.” Merkel insisted that such postings must be dealt with by the companies or the government will step in.

In her speech in May to the EU, Merkel doubled down on her attacks on free speech as a threat to the world order. She called for the prosecution of  American companies for spreading “disinformation” and “hate” online.

She denounced the “so-called social media” platforms as still not facing “accountability for lies.” She added, “I can only encourage you to continue regulating social media.”

I could think of no better recipient for the first European Order of Merit. No one better sums up EU values than Angela Merkel and her unrelenting campaign against free speech. For globalists who have called for “A New World Order with European Values,” Merkel is the perfect personification of a globalist dream of a world of regulated speech and transnational government.

Poland will not obstruct the commencement of negotiations regarding Ukraine’s accession to the European Union, but Warsaw remains firmly opposed to granting any preferential treatment to Kyiv, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has told journalists.

Relations between the two Eastern European allies have reached crisis-mode of late, after President Volodymyr Zelensky named an elite special operations unit after “UPA Heroes” – to denote a high honor for battlefield performance.

For Warsaw, uplifting this name is tantamount to backing the genocide against the Polish people:

For Poland, the UPA, or the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, is responsible for a campaign of genocidal ethnic cleansing in the 1940s that resulted in the deaths of an estimated 100,000 Polish civilians in Volhynia (known as Volyn in Ukrainian and Wołyń in Polish), a historic region with deep Polish and Ukrainian roots. This violence also systematically targeted Jewish survivors who had escaped the Holocaust.

Amid the diplomatic dispute sparked by the renaming, the Polish government is still promising not to let the issue steer its thinking on Ukraine’s aspirations to join the European Union. It is pledging to remain objective related to examining Ukraine’s status.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk specifically pledge before reporters this week that his government will not use the WW2 issue to block the start of EU negotiations centered on Ukraine.

“We are not going to trade our support for [European] ambitions of Ukraine,” Tusk stated. According to more background:

The Prime Minister was responding to a reporter’s question about whether Warsaw intended to block the accession talks following recent decisions by Volodymyr Zelenskyy to glorify historical followers of Stepan Bandera.

Despite the diplomatic friction, Tusk emphasized that Warsaw would maintain a strict, standard approach to the accession process.

“Nevertheless, there will be no special terms from our side. Poland will support Ukraine on its path to Europe on terms that will be European, as well as safe and beneficial for Poland,” Tusk added.

🔴Poles’ Reaction to “Heroes of the UPA” is an act of Cain

Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn — an educator within the Azov-rooted 3rd Assault Brigade whose callsign is “Nachtigall” (after the Abwehr battalion formed from the OUN in 1941) — described Polish outrage over awarding a military… pic.twitter.com/kxXat3M3in

— Marta Havryshko (@HavryshkoMarta) June 7, 2026

Poland also has other pressing concerns, not the least of which is the immigration and war refugee issue. Poland has throughout over four years of the Ukraine war had to absorb hundreds of thousands of refugees and war-displaced families.

A future where Ukraine could become part of the EU might prove a major drain on Poland’s own struggling economy and resources.