Another big piece of leverage that Washington is holding over Tehran is the potential seizure of Iranian oil tankers. The US intercepting and boarding tankers on the high seas has been a trend related to Venezuela of late, as well as Russia’s so-called dark fleet, ratcheting tensions with Moscow.

But President Trump is said to be holding off for now when it comes to the Iranians, as the process of indirect negotiations based in Oman plays out, also as Israel’s Netanyahu is received at the White House on Wednesday.

Fresh reporting in The Wall Street Journal indicates “Trump administration officials have discussed whether to seize additional tankers involved in transporting Iranian oil but have held off, concerned about Tehran’s near-certain retaliation and the impact on global oil markets, U.S. officials said.”

But there have been US naval interdictions involving Iranian energy related to the Venezuela blockade: “The U.S. has seized several ships that have carried Iranian oil as part of its two-month-old blockade of sanctioned tankers serving Venezuela,” continues WSJ. “The tankers, which make up the so-called shadow fleet, help transport illicit oil from numerous sanctioned countries to China and other buyers.”

The report notes that “A move by the U.S. to block other sanctioned ships from loading oil in Iran would squeeze Tehran’s main source of revenue, expanding the aggressive strategy the White House put in place in December in the Caribbean.”

So there remains this big card to play, but Trump is so far hesitant on concerns of rapidly driving up the price of oil.

Sanctions have been slapped on Iranian tankers, but action has yet to follow, as WSJ explains further:

But the option of stopping tankers, one of several the White House has been debating to coerce Tehran to reach a deal restricting its nuclear program, faces many obstacles, some of the officials said.

Iran is likely to respond to a stepped-up U.S. crackdown by seizing tankers carrying oil from U.S. allies in the region or even by mining the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow exit from the Persian Gulf through which as much as 25% of the world’s petroleum supply passes. Either move is likely to drive up oil prices sharply, risking a political firestorm for the White House.

More than 20 ships that transport Iranian oil have been sanctioned by the Treasury Department this year, making them possible seizure targets, officials say.

This would likely be a next big step of escalation Washington has in its pocket, before any potential US military (or Israeli) action targeting Tehran.

Oil prices are rising this morning as U.S.–Iran tensions stay elevated.

The Trump administration reportedly weighed seizing additional Iranian oil tankers, but backed off over retaliation and market impact fears.#OOTT pic.twitter.com/uKq7r9fram

— OilPrice.com (@OilandEnergy) February 11, 2026

Despite the recent weeks of alarming Iran-related headlines, oil prices have by and large not reacted dramatically, given reports that Trump favors negotiated settlement to Iran’s nuclear program.

Vice President JD Vance has also clarified the ball is in Iran’s court, and that talks are still ongoing:

JD Vance on Iran:

If the Iranian people want to overthrow the regime, that’s up to the Iranian people.

What we’re focused on right now is the fact that Iran can’t have a nuclear weapon. pic.twitter.com/lsUXZfS7FC

— Clash Report (@clashreport) February 11, 2026

Iran meanwhile has made clear that its missile program is not up for negotiation, despite Washington’s insistence that this be on the table.

Ali Shamkhani, an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, reiterated Wednesday that missile capabilities are “non-negotiable” but that Tehran is open to nuclear limits in exchange for sanctions relief.

The Congressional Budget Office raised its 10-year deficit estimate by $1.4 trillion, citing Trump’s 2025 reconciliation act, higher tariffs and lower immigration.

• Annual deficits are projected to remain historically large, totaling $23.1 trillion from 2026 to 2035 and reaching 6.7% of GDP by 2036.

• The 2025 tax law is the single largest driver, adding $4.7 trillion to deficits over the decade, partially offset by roughly $3 trillion in tariff revenue.

• Federal debt held by the public is projected to rise to 120% of GDP by 2036, surpassing the post-World War II record by 2030.

• Interest costs are expected to double over the next decade, climbing from $1 trillion in 2026 to $2.1 trillion in 2036 as debt and rates rise.

• Economic growth is projected to strengthen in 2026 but slow to 1.8% thereafter, falling short of the administration’s 3% growth target despite productivity gains from artificial intelligence.

The federal government is barreling toward a decade of historically large budget deficits, according to a new report from the (arguably partisan) Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which said on Wednesday in a new report that recent tax and immigration policies have sharply worsened the long-term outlook. 

The CBO increased its estimate of cumulative deficits for the 2026-35 period by $1.4 trillion, citing President Donald Trump’s 2025 tax law and the cost of stepped-up immigration enforcement. The agency now projects total deficits of $23.1 trillion over the decade, underscoring what it called an “unsustainable fiscal path.”

At the center of the revision is last summer’s tax package, which extended the 2017 tax cuts and added new breaks. The CBO estimates the law will increase deficits by $4.7 trillion over 10 years. Immigration enforcement actions are expected to add another $500 billion. Those costs, the agency said, will more than offset revenue gains from higher tariffs, even as import duties rise to levels not seen since the mid-20th century. The CBO estimates tariff revenue will reduce deficits by about $3 trillion over the period.

Since its last long-term outlook in January 2025, the agency said three developments have materially altered its baseline projections: enactment of the 2025 reconciliation act, a sharp rise in tariffs, and lower immigration. Together, those changes have pushed projected deficits for the coming decade $1.4 trillion higher, to a cumulative $23.1 trillion from 2026 through 2035.

“The budget projections continue to indicate that the fiscal trajectory is not sustainable,” CBO Director Phillip Swagel said in prepared remarks accompanying the report.

For fiscal 2026, the deficit is projected at $1.9 trillion, or 5.8% of gross domestic product, roughly unchanged as a share of the economy from 2025. By 2036, the annual deficit is expected to widen to $3.1 trillion, or 6.7% of GDP – levels the agency described as “historically unusual,” particularly with unemployment projected to remain below 5%.

The latest outlook reflects the effects of President Donald Trump’s 2025 tax law, which extended the 2017 tax cuts and added new provisions. The CBO estimates the reconciliation act will raise deficits by $4.7 trillion over the 2026–35 period, once higher debt-service costs and macroeconomic effects are included. Higher tariffs are projected to reduce deficits by about $3 trillion, while lower immigration adds roughly $500 billion.

Revenues are projected to remain broadly stable as a share of the economy, rising modestly from 17.5% of GDP in 2026 to 17.8% in 2036. Outlays, however, are expected to climb from 23.3% to 24.4% of GDP as spending on Social Security, Medicare and interest costs grows faster than economic output.

Debt held by the public is projected to rise from 99% of GDP at the end of 2025 to 120% by 2036. Under current law, the CBO expects debt to surpass the previous postwar record of 106% of GDP—set in 1946—by 2030. Over a 30-year horizon, debt climbs to an estimated 175% of GDP. The Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund is now projected to be exhausted in 2032, a year earlier than previously forecast.

Rising debt feeds directly into higher interest costs. Net interest outlays are projected to double over the next decade, increasing from $1 trillion in 2026 to $2.1 trillion in 2036 and rising from 3.3% to 4.6% of GDP.

Those projections undercut the administration’s stated goal of reducing the deficit toward 3% of GDP by the end of Mr. Trump’s term, a target repeatedly cited by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. The CBO now expects deficits of 5.8% of GDP in 2026 and about 6% in 2028.

On the economic front, the agency projects stronger real GDP growth in 2026, as the pro-growth elements of the tax law outweigh the drag from tariffs and reduced immigration. Growth is then expected to slow to 1.8% from 2027 onward, reflecting offsetting forces: stronger incentives to work and invest on one hand, and larger deficits and slower labor-force growth on the other.

The outlook also incorporates a modest boost from generative artificial intelligence, which the CBO estimates will add roughly 10 basis points a year to productivity growth, raising nonfarm business output by about 1% by 2036.

Even so, the growth dividend is not enough to materially improve the fiscal picture. While stronger growth lifts revenues, it also pushes up interest rates, and the latter effect dominates. “That result highlights how the nation’s large stock of debt influences the way that changes in the economy stemming from legislation affect the federal budget,” Mr. Swagel said.

The forecast also assumes the Federal Reserve cuts its benchmark rate by 25 basis points in 2026, with the yield on 10-year Treasury bonds rising gradually to about 4.3% by late 2027 and then stabilizing. Upward pressure from growing federal debt is expected to be offset by slower labor-force growth.

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has echoed the CBO’s warning in recent remarks, saying that while today’s debt level is manageable, the long-term path is not. “We’re running a very large deficit at essentially full employment,” Mr. Powell said last month. “The fiscal picture needs to be addressed – and it’s not really being addressed.”

On the other hand…

Perhaps CBO is just talking shit because they’re #resistance?

According to some economists, CBO might be understating the deficit-reducing potential of tariffs by assuming sharper declines in import volumes than recent experience suggests. Economist Andrew Rechenberg and analyses by the Coalition for a Prosperous America point to tariff revenues collected since 2018 that remained resilient even as trade patterns shifted. In many cases, imports were rerouted through alternative supply chains rather than eliminated, while demand proved more inelastic than expected in categories such as intermediate goods and energy inputs. Under those conditions, sustained tariff enforcement – particularly with limited exemptions – could generate revenues above baseline projections.

Other analysts contend that the CBO’s long-term outlook may be overly cautious in its assessment of how tax certainty and trade policy interact with domestic investment. Permanent tax provisions and trade barriers that favor domestic production, they argue, can reinforce incentives for reshoring and capital formation in ways that are difficult to fully capture in baseline projections. Former CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf has previously acknowledged that long-run investment and productivity responses to permanent policy changes are inherently uncertain and may unfold gradually, suggesting that modest but persistent gains in domestic output could meaningfully improve fiscal outcomes over time.

Meanwhile, some economists question whether higher projected deficits will translate as directly into rising interest costs as the CBO assumes. They point to continued global demand for U.S. Treasurys, demographic forces that suppress real interest rates, and the dollar’s role as the world’s primary reserve currency as factors that weaken the link between debt levels and borrowing costs. From this perspective, fiscal sustainability is less about historical deficit benchmarks and more about market tolerance – specifically whether rising debt triggers inflation expectations or capital flight – conditions that, thus far, have not materialized.

Oil prices continued their recent rally this morning as traders hiked its risk premium as Israeli PM Netanyahu arrived in Washington to pressure President Trump to take a hard line in talks with Iran, even as the API report overnight showed a huge rise in US inventories last week.

“Oil trades firmer, with Brent back above USD 69 as Middle East tensions sustain a modest risk premium. The US signaled it is considering seizing tankers carrying Iranian oil, while President Trump threatened to deploy another aircraft carrier should nuclear talks with Iran fail,” Saxo Bank noted.

The threats of violence in the Persian Gulf – a region that supplies about a fifth of the world’s daily oil consumption – comes even as signs supply remains well ahead of demand.

“While rhetoric remains belligerent at times, there are no signs, at least for now, of escalation, and the U.S. President believes that Iran will ultimately want to strike a deal on its nuclear missile programme,” PVM Oil Associates analyst Tamas Varga said in a note.

If API’s huge build is confirmed by the official data, the battle between geopolitical risk premia and over-supply gets harder (but admittedly this is very much affected by the freezing storms).

Expect another volatile week of EIA data with “significant winter freeze noise,” Macquarie energy strategist Walt Chancellor said referring to last month’s storm.

API

• Crude +13.4mm

• Cushing

• Gasoline +3.3mm

• Distillates -2.0mm

DOE

• Crude +8.53mm (-400k exp) – biggest build since Jan 2025

• Cushing +1.07mm

• Gasoline +1.16mm

• Distillates -2.70mm

The official data confirmed a large crude build (largest since Jan 2025), but smaller than feared from API. Gasoline stocks rose for the 13th straight week while Distillates saw stocks fall for the second week…

Source: Bloomberg

This build pushed total crude stocks up to their highest since June…

Source: Bloomberg

Stockpiles at Cushing, Oklahoma, rose to 25.1 million barrels, the highest level since April 2025. The weekly build is the largest in almost a month, and the first increase on inventories since the week ending Jan. 16. 

US Crude production rebounded as expected from its winter storm plunge…

Source: Bloomberg

Crude prices started giving some back before the inventory data as stocks tumbled following the ‘good’ jobs news. However, WTI remains higher on the day (back near its highest since January)…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, in its monthly Short-Term Energy Outlook released Tuesday, The EIA again warned global inventories will rise this year and next on high output from OPEC+ and producers in the Americas.

“Despite near-term tightness from disruptions, we assess that strong global oil production growth will continue to outpace oil consumption over our forecast, driving our assessment that global oil inventories will increase. We expect this trend to continue in both 2026 and 2027. We forecast that global oil inventory builds will average 3.1 million b/d in 2026, compared with an average build of 2.7 million b/d in 2025, before decreasing to average of 2.7 million b/d in 2027,” the agency said.

In the wider market, OPEC left its supply-demand expectations for the oil market largely unchanged in its monthly report, but highlighted that global oil demand for the wider group’s crude will drop by 400,000 bpd in the second quarter compared to the first.

There are conflicting reports that Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky is actually planning on holding elections in a few months. It all started with this Wednesday FT headline: “Zelenskyy plans spring elections alongside referendum on peace deal after US push.”

Financial Times as well as the UK Times says that Zelensky is planning to announce a spring election alongside a referendum on any peace deal to end the war with Russia. The votes would be held simultaneously, and the target month would be May, the report claims.

“In the face of pressure from the White House, the Ukrainian leader intends to announce the move on February 24, the fourth anniversary of Russia’s invasion, the Financial Times reported on Wednesday,” the report says.

This is of course in reference to the full-scale Russian invasion of 2022, as the war is entering its fifth year. But not all sources are in agreement as to Zelensky’s election plans.

So far he has resisted Trump admin pressure to announce an election, citing lack of security across the country to ensure a fair and smooth voting process. A key stipulation pushed by Zelensky is that Russia would have to agree to a temporary ceasefire for the vote to proceed, and this scenario is very unlikely at this point in the conflict.

The pushback against the initial FT report comes from local Ukrainian media. In this particular case it is probably the more accurate report:

As of now, President Volodymyr Zelensky does not plan to announce presidential elections or a referendum on a possible peace deal with Russia on Feb. 24, a source in the President’s Office familiar with the matter told the Kyiv Independent on Feb. 11.

The comment came after the Financial Times reported that Kyiv was preparing to hold both votes this spring and that Zelensky could unveil the plan on the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion.

So Zelensky’s office itself is rejecting the claims of Western media. Again, this is consistent with Zelensky’s stance on this issue throughout escalating pressure from Washington, and clearly nothing fundamentally has changed.

The Kyiv Independent report went so far as to blast the initial reporting as “rumors”. A source in the Ukrainian president’s office said, “Well, I guess someone somewhere is talking about it. It’s not the first time they’ve been spreading rumors,” the source in the President’s Office said. “Next week, there are meetings. If there is progress, then maybe something will change.” The official added: “So far, there is no progress.”

Ukrainian media & sources in Zelensky’s office say this is fake news…

Zelenskyy plans spring elections alongside referendum on peace deal after US push https://t.co/Jpyy8s131K

— Financial Times (@FT) February 11, 2026

Parliament is examining the issue, after months ago Zelensky ordered lawmakers to prepare changes to election laws that would permit voting under martial law; however, no revisions have been passed and the issue has been essentially buried in committee debate. This itself (a formal committee examination of a potential election) appears just a symbolic move to placate the Trump administration.

Authored by Michael Every via Rabobank,

24 Hours

US retail sales soft, yields down, stocks up, oil up.

That’s one way to look at the last 24 hours. 

Or one can look at it –and the next 24 hours– more deeply.

Let’s start with geopolitics, then look at AI, and try to tie it all together into a better market take than the above.

As @desmondshum underlines:

“Europe isn’t merely “slowing.” It’s being structurally out-scaled and outbid – squeezed between an America that owns the high-tech frontier and a China that has moved from low-end volume into the mid-tech industrial core Europe once dominated…

…Without a hard turn –fast trade defence, real industrial policy, and bloc-level unity– Europe’s “model” doesn’t get reformed; it gets liquidated.”

Macron just declared a European ‘state of emergency’, arguing EU-US tensions are far from over, and the bloc must become a global economic power or risk being swept aside. 

He called for Eurobonds to Make Europe Great Again. Within hours, Germany shot that down. Macron called for ‘Made in Europe’ policies.

They were also shot down by Germany and Italy. A new French report argues Europe needs to immediately impose 30% tariffs against China or devalue EUR vs CNY by 20-30% (how?) to retain its industrial core. That will get shot down – what then?

In 24 hours, an informal Leaders’ retreat with Draghi and Letta dedicated to ‘strengthening the single market in a new geoeconomic context’ will, zeitgeistly, be held in Alden Biesen castle to assess how the EU should position itself for increased –and not always fair– economic competition and trade imbalances.

Draghi now favours a multi-speed/tier Europe, not one speed for all. But what will the others say? There’s parallel talk of Ukraine entering the EU as soon as 2027. How literally market moving will it all prove? Don’t sweep those questions aside!

Finland’s President expects the US will use the looming Munich Security Conference to reset strained EU ties. That follows Europe agreeing to join the US critical minerals plan, which limits its options for strategic autonomy, and as: the EU parliament agreed to proceed with the EU-US trade deal; EU capitals say deleting US tech is not realistic; US-backed start-ups won a major German military drone contract; ‘even some of Mercosur’s biggest fans are nervous about moving too fast’, and the European Commission will unveil new security measures on access to public funding in March designed to shut out Chinese companies in particular.

Or Munich could go as badly as last year. The US is likely to be enraged by recent EU actions against its tech firms and claims of election interference, as the conference report released ahead of it warns Trump is a “demolition man” and “most of Europe is watching the US’ descent into ‘competitive authoritarianism’ with rising concern or even horror, wondering how resilient US democracy really is.” That said, the US ambassador to NATO just underlined the US just wants Europe to take primary responsibility for European defence as soon as possible, not as soon as comfortable – and there is a short shortlist of EU geostrategic options if Munich sees a new crisis.

Regardless, Europe needs to do much more and faster. 

As Russian casualties in Ukraine surge, Estonian intelligence claims its shell output soared to 7m in 2025, up from 4.5m, and it’s bringing drone training into schools and sucking more of the private sector into its war economy. To match these “preparations for the next war”, as Norway warns Russia could invade it, Europe will need to keep pace. The former head of Britain’s armed forces, with eight days of ammo, says Europe ‘must become a military superpower.’ Add that to Macron’s list?

Meanwhile, Israeli PM heads for the US to meet Trump as we wait to see if an Iran deal is struck, or if Iran is struck; and underlining how fast things are moving, Turkey –next to Europe– says it could join the nuclear arms race if Iran acquires a bomb.

So, what will Greece then want?

Let’s now turn to AI, where developments are as rapid and tectonic as in geopolitics – and the two are linked.

Many talked about AI as a meme to chase, a bubble, or something that won’t really impact them that much. Yet @mattshumer_ argues this is like early reactions to Covid headlines from China.

(There, I guessed what would happen immediately, and recall being told a first estimate of the impact on the global economy was to lower Chinese GDP by 0.1% in 2020, full stop: I couldn’t stop my exasperated reaction.)

Shumer argues we already have commercial AI, with adverts to keep prices down, that’s transformative even for small businesses: and it destroys swathes of white-collar employment. Software now creates its own software, instantly. Wall Street is already shorting sectors seen as prone to being replaced by AI, says Bloomberg. Some may not exist soon: recall High Street travel agents? How long until we say, ‘Recall brokers? Coders? Lawyers?’ Or analysts who tell you what a Bloomberg AI said a few hours previously. I may risk looking like a horse’s backside after mocking early iterations of AI –I reprinted the hilarious first AI script for a John Wick movie also involving horses– but an analyst who can’t see this AI trend upends everything around them risks being a loyal workhorse staring in bemusement at the first car.

Neo-Luddites will arise: but failing a Butlerian jihad, every economy will demand AI that creates AI and AI-driven robots that build more robots, which can work and fight wars.

Human intelligence should be able to project what demand is going to look like. Human cynicism and history will speak to the rewards that will flow to the winners, and the penalties, in terms of relative loss of wealth and power, which will be dumped on the losers.

However, as @ctindale points out, and some humans didn’t get until recently, unlimited AI power still requires limited physical inputs. It will need vast amounts of cheap electricity; metals such as copper, where supplies are limited (and the US and China have built stockpiles); rare earths; oil, for the plastics; and midstream facilities like smelters and refineries – things the liberal world order told Western economies not to build.

This will be zero-sum because of the military component and demand vs supply. It will therefore require control of resources and mines; ports; ocean carriers; and naval chokepoints. It will essentially be the 19th century race for steel, or the 20th century race for oil or nuclear power – but this time with a sci-fi multiplier for those who get there first and can sustain a system which improves itself. If you can’t do any of the above, you either join a power who can, on its terms, or risk suffering the fate of countries who didn’t keep up with tech changes in the 19th and 20th centuries – which didn’t allow them comfortable artisanal lives in bucolic castles.

Obviously, this has major implications beyond markets and high-level summits. 

If you think the liberal world order is holding on by its fingernails now, and it is, try adding mass white collar unemployment –the demographic that starts revolutions– to the mix.

Ironically, the one upside may be if one has a shrinking workforce, as Boomers and Gen X can retire, allowing the jobs that remain to be done by AI and robots. How non LWO economies, and those with growing labour forces, fare remains to be seen.

If you think our institutional geoeconomic architecture just rides this out, and an abstract national interest rate from a central bank has any meaning at any level in a world in which everything starts to revolve around free brainpower (AI) and free labour (robots), based on the supply of limited resources that some have and others don’t, but everyone wants,… then I have a nice carrot and some oats for you to munch on.

And you are already wearing your own blinkers.

Then it’s off to the glue factory, perhaps.

Update (0950ET):

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy confirmed on X that the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of War “acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion” at or near the border town of El Paso.

“The threat has been neutralized, and there is no danger to commercial travel in the region. The restrictions have been lifted, and normal flights are resuming,” Duffy said.

The FAA and DOW acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion.

The threat has been neutralized, and there is no danger to commercial travel in the region.

The restrictions have been lifted and normal flights are resuming. https://t.co/xQA1cMy7l0

— Secretary Sean Duffy (@SecDuffy) February 11, 2026

Our assessment this year is that next-gen counter-drone security will be an emerging theme for guarding high-value assets such as stadiums, government buildings, data centers, and, increasingly, parts of the border (see the report).

*   *   * 

Update (0925ET):

The Federal Aviation Administration announced moments ago that the Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) across the border town of El Paso and a large area of southern New Mexico west of Santa Teresa has been lifted.

The temporary closure of airspace over El Paso has been lifted. There is no threat to commercial aviation. All flights will resume as normal.

— The FAA ✈️ (@FAANews) February 11, 2026

The NOTAM that halted all commercial, cargo, and general aviation flights across the region was issued overnight.

CNN reporter Pete Muntean cited an FAA source who “tells me the El Paso flight ban was driven by military operations from Biggs Army Air Field at Fort Bliss. The FAA acted after the Defense Department could not assure civilian flight safety.”

BREAKING: A source briefed by FAA tells me the El Paso flight ban was driven by military operations from Biggs Army Air Field at Fort Bliss. The FAA acted after the Defense Department could not assure civilian flight safety. pic.twitter.com/r3Vdrmpday

— Pete Muntean (@petemuntean) February 11, 2026

Another reporter, this one with Reuters, said, “Airline sources told Reuters the grounding of flights in El Paso was believed to be tied to the Pentagon’s use of counterdrone technology to address Mexican drug cartels’ use of drones on the U.S.-Mexico border.“

Airline sources told Reuters the grounding of flights in El Paso was believed to be tied to the Pentagon’s use of counterdrone technology to address Mexican drug cartels’ use of drones of the U.S.-Mexico border. @davidshepardson

— Idrees Ali (@idreesali114) February 11, 2026

At this point, what exactly happened in the border town or nearby remains unclear.

What has our attention is the alleged use of counter-drone technology along the border, reportedly aimed at disrupting Mexican drug cartels’ growing reliance on drones.

*   *   * 

The Federal Aviation Administration issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) late Tuesday, closing the airspace above the U.S. border town of El Paso and a large area of southern New Mexico west of Santa Teresa for 10 days. The notice suspends all commercial, cargo, and general aviation flights in the affected area.

The FAA has issued a NOTAM halting all flight operations at El Paso International Airport (ELP/KELP) for 10 days.

The reason given is “Temporary flight restrictions for special security reasons.” pic.twitter.com/H7NWZ3KnBp

— Flightradar24 (@flightradar24) February 11, 2026

The reason for the NOTAM is listed on the FAA website as “Special Security Reasons.” No further explanation was provided, but given that El Paso sits on the U.S. border with Mexico and the Trump administration is targeting drug cartels across the Western Hemisphere, the closure could be tied to a new perceived threat – or impending US military operation. 

The NOTAM took effect at 11:30 p.m. Mountain Time Tuesday, and expires at 11:30 p.m. Feb. 20, or next Friday.

The El Paso city government issued an advisory earlier that read, “The FAA, on short notice, issued a temporary flight restriction halting all flights to and from El Paso and our neighboring community, Santa Teresa, NM. The restriction prohibits all aircraft operations (including commercial, cargo and general aviation) and is effective from February 10 at 11:30 PM (MST) to February 20 at 11:30 PM (MST).”

Local newspaper El Paso Matters points out:

Closing off airspace over a major U.S. city is a rare action, and officials with the Federal Aviation Administration didn’t immediately respond to questions from El Paso Matters on the reasons for the action.

A person familiar with the notices, who asked not to be identified because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly, said the action to close airspace over a major U.S. city for security reasons over an extended period hasn’t happened since immediately after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Our assessment is that this unusually broad NOTAM over the border town reflects a time-bound, high-issue security concern rather than routine airspace management. It comes as the Trump administration repostures the military to secure the Western Hemisphere, including the early January capture of Nicolas Maduro and ongoing kinetic strikes against suspected narco trafficking vessels.

One of the consequences of the Trump administration blowing up narco boats and dismantling cartel command-and-control nodes is an increased risk of retaliatory threats against the U.S. 

Ten people including the shooter are dead after ⁠an ⁠assailant opened fire at a high school in western ⁠Canada in the town of Tumbler Ridge on Tuesday in one of the country’s deadliest mass casualty events in recent history.  Initial reports by local police and the Canadian media described the shooter as female.

However, the authorities reluctance to release the identity of the suspect was an immediate red flag.  Their reports only indicated that the shooter was a female in a dress.  

Independent journalists now say they have the identity of the alleged shooter, corroborated by family members:  Jesse Strang, a 17-year-old biological male who started identifying as a “woman” in 2023, is reportedly the culprit behind the school massacre which left 10 dead and 25 wounded.   

In an exclusive interview with “Juno News” Jesse Strang’s uncle, Russel G. Strang, confirms that Jesse was the shooter and that he identified as transgender. 

Strang’s social media and YouTube accounts contain transgender symbolism as well as the online name “JessJessUwU” (a meme phrase that people may recognize from the bullet casings tied to the gay suspect charged in the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Tyler Robinson). 

🇨🇦 A transgender teenager has killed 10 and injured 25 in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada.

Jesse Strang, 17, began to identify as a woman in 2023.

Six victims were found dead inside Tumbler Ridge Secondary School and another died on the way to the hospital. Two more… pic.twitter.com/w4fM4fVRDk

— Europa.com (@europa) February 11, 2026

Locals in Tumbler Ridge also confirmed the shooter’s identity as Jesse Strang, as reported by the Western Standard, though his transgender status is not mentioned.  

Before heading to the school, Strang allegedly murdered his mother and younger brother, both of whom were well known in the community.  

The fact that Canadian authorities incorrectly asserted that the shooter was “female” led to initial confusion, but this action is essentially required according to Canada’s strict “hate speech” laws protecting trans identity.  In other words, Canadian police are often compelled to lie about the gender of suspects when they are trans. 

The tragedy represent yet more evidence that transgenderism is a dangerous mental health crisis.  Multiple mass shootings (including school shootings) have been perpetrated by transgender suspects in recent years, and suspected Charlie Kirk shooter, Tyler Robinson, was living with his transgender boyfriend at the time of the shooting.   

In almost every instance, the transgender status of the shooter has been covered up or dismissed by authorities and the establishment media. 

In Canada, trans activists receive substantial legal privileges and protections making any discourse on the dangers of trans ideology impossible.  

“I am now leaving for the United States for my seventh trip to meet with President Trump since he was elected for a second term,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said prior to his departure to Washington. “This, of course, does not include his unforgettable visit to Israel and his speech in the Knesset.” (Seven since Trump took office again!)

He and President Trump are expected to begin their meeting at the White House, focused on Iran negotiations and the possibility of military action, by late-morning (11 eastern). Netanyahu’s ‘welcome’ in D.C. last night raised some eyebrows, given an entire major freeway into the beltway area was shut down for security reasons…

They are literally shutting down highways for Netanyahu’s arrival in DC

pic.twitter.com/94YbO5Cy2t

— Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) February 11, 2026

Before leaving Israel, Netanyahu told reporters that Iran is the “first and foremost” issue he will raise with Trump. He was originally scheduled to travel to the US for a February 18 meeting, but Israel asked to move it up after the US-Iran talks in Oman.

“I will present the president with our views regarding the essential principles of the negotiations – principles that, in our eyes, are vital not only for Israel but for anyone in the world who desires peace and security in the Middle East,” the Israeli leader previewed.

Israel is pressing the US to require that any agreement with Iran include zero nuclear enrichment and limits on its ballistic missile program. Iranian officials have rejected those terms, signaling they would block any deal. On Tuesday, Trump indicated that Iran’s missiles should be part of the agreement. 

But if Tehran were to agree with this it would essentially be self-destructing, as it would have no deterrent and be defenseless against any future Israeli attack – or any other enemy aggression for that matter.

One Israeli source told CNN that Tel Aviv is “worried about Iran’s progress in restoring its ballistic missile stockpiles and capabilities to its status before the 12-Day War.”

Iranian leaders are meanwhile fully aware of what Netanyahu’s D.C. trip represents, and the timing:

Tehran, which resumed talks with Washington last week in Oman, warned Monday of “destructive influences” on diplomacy ahead of the Israeli premier’s visit.

On Wednesday, Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian said his country would “not yield to excessive demands” on its nuclear program, though he said the country is not seeking an atomic weapon.

Just after Netanyahu’s arrival Tuesday evening, he met with US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and White House senior adviser Jared Kushner to discuss “regional issues”. He was also briefed on how Oman-mediated talks are going, ahead of the proposed second round expected next week.

President Trump is still threatening to send a second carrier group to the Central Command (CENTCOM) area, which would be a clear signal he intends major military action. He could still order some kind of limited action, also as Congress is once again missing in action on reigning in war powers.

Via Academy Securities’ Peter Tchir,

There is almost nothing to nitpick about this report (though we do have some caveats).

Big beat on jobs 130k vs 65k expected. Private jobs crushed it, adding 172k (yes, public sector jobs shrank).

Downward revision for prior 2 reports was “only” -17k.

The benchmark revisions were -862k.

A big number but -825k was baked in, so kind of a rounding error at this stage on “old” data.

Unemployment rate dropped to 4.3%.

Not only did the household survey add 528k jobs, but we got this drop even while labor participation INCREASED to 62.5% – a very healthy shift in unemployment.

The birth/death model showed job losses of 69k.

Since I do think birth/death had an outsized influence on the revisions it is good to see a negative number here. It gives me more confidence in the print.

What is there to complain about?

• NSA (not seasonally adjusted) had a drop of 2,649,000 jobs.

  • We have been complaining (for years) that the seasonal adjustments have a lot of issues and this year’s might be worse than usual in that respect

  • We still add a lot of jobs in winter and take them away in summer, because that is how the weather worked (slowing in the Northeast), but we no longer believe that is accurate as so much construction has moved to the South.

  • It adds back a lot of jobs that were added for the holidays. It is unclear how many jobs were really added for the holidays. It does not help that the government shutdown(s) has made the data even less reliable than usual.

• In 2025 the largest downward revision was in February where they took away 167k from the prior 2 reports.

These two factors are why I will take this payroll data with a “grain of salt”.

The market has immediately priced in a more hawkish Fed with rate-cut expectations tumbling.

Ahead of today’s jobs report, the Trump admin unleashed a full court press to warn markets about what was expected to be a very weak numbers, with Peter Navarro saying “we have to revise our expectations down significantly for what a monthly job number should look like” and Kevin Hassett told CNBC on Monday to “expect slightly smaller job numbers” and that “one shouldn’t panic” if the labor data comes in weak. That’s also why the whisper number ahead of today’s jobs print was well below the consensus, at 35K vs 65K median consensus. 

And so with markets and traders fully expecting a ugly print – with Bloomberg’s chief economist looking for a 0 January print – the BLS decided to shock everyone, and reported than in January the US added 130K jobs, double the 65K median estimate and up from a downward revised December print of 48K (vs 50K previously). This was also the highest monthly jobs increase since December 2024.

While today’s number was double the median consensus, here is some additional color: at 130K, the forecast was higher than 79 out of 80 forecasts, with just Citigroup’s 135K forecast higher.

That said, expect today’s number to be revised sharply lower last month: that’s because the November report was revised down by 15,000, from +56,000 to +41,000, and the change for December was revised down by 2,000, from +50,000 to +48,000. With these revisions,  employment in November and December combined is 17,000 lower than previously reported. It gets worse though, with 25 of the past 26 jobs reports revised lower. 

There is another reason why today’s report will be revised away: while the seasonally adjusted change was a stronger than expected 130K, the unadjusted was a negative 2.649 million. That means that the entire delta in today’s “surprise beat” was due to seasonal  adjustments. 

The positive surprise in the payrolls number also translated into improvement in the unemployment rate, which unexpectedly dropped to 4.3%, down from 4.4% in December where it was expected to stay. Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for teenagers declined to 13.6 percent in January. The jobless rates for adult men (3.8 percent), adult women (4.0 percent), and people who are White (3.7 percent), Black (7.2 percent), Asian (4.1 percent), or Hispanic (4.7 percent) all posted modest improvements in recent months. 

Tied to this, the labor force participation rate rose to 62.5%, up from 62.4% and fractionally better than the expected unchanged print. 

There was more positive surprises: in January, hourly earnings rose 0.4% MoM, up from a downward revised (of course) 0.1% in January and above the 0.3% estimate. On a YoY basis, this translated to a 3.7% increase in average hourly earnings, in line with estimates and unchanged from the previous month.

Some more details from the report:

• The number of people employed part time for economic reasons decreased by 453,000 to 4.9 million in January but is up by 410,000 over the year. These individuals would have preferred full-time employment but were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. 
• In January, the number of people not in the labor force who currently want a job decreased by 399,000 to 5.8 million. These individuals were not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the 4 weeks preceding the survey or were unavailable to take a job. 
• Among those not in the labor force who wanted a job, the number of people marginally attached to the labor force changed little at 1.7 million in January. These individuals wanted and were available for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. The number of discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them, also changed little at 475,000 in January. 

Taking a closer look at the Establishment survey, we find that job gains occurred in health care, social assistance, and construction, while federal government and financial activities lost jobs. Payroll employment changed little in 2025 (+15,000 per month on average).Here is the breakdown:

• Health care added 82,000 jobs in January, with gains in ambulatory health care services (+50,000), hospitals (+18,000), and nursing and residential care facilities (+13,000). Job growth in health care averaged 33,000 per month in 2025. 
• Employment in social assistance increased by 42,000 in January, primarily in individual and family services (+38,000).
• Construction added 33,000 jobs in January, reflecting an employment gain in nonresidential specialty trade contractors (+25,000). Employment in construction was essentially flat in 2025.
• In January, federal government employment continued to decline (-34,000) as some federal employees who accepted a deferred resignation offer in 2025 came off federal payrolls. Since reaching a peak in October 2024, federal government employment is down by 327,000, or 10.9
• percent.
• Financial activities employment declined by 22,000 in January and is down by 49,000 since reaching a recent peak in May 2025. Within the industry, insurance carriers and related activities lost 11,000 jobs over the month.

And visually:

Of these, the most notable is was the ongoing sharp decline in government workers, which tumbled by 42K, and are down 5 of the past 6 months.

Last but not least, extending last month’s move, in January the bulk of job creation was full time jobs which increased by 582K, while part-time jobs rose by only 31K.

And while the January numbers was stellar (at least until it is revised much lower in coming months), the much uglier part to today’s jobs report was the dramatic negative benchmark revisions which we highlighted yesterday. 

As we noted, the establishment survey data released today was re-benchmarked to reflect comprehensive counts of payroll jobs for March 2025. These counts are derived principally from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), which counts jobs covered by the Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax system. The benchmark process results in revisions to not seasonally adjusted data from April 2024 forward. Seasonally adjusted data from January 2021 forward are subject to revision. In addition, data for some series prior to 2021, both seasonally adjusted and unadjusted, incorporate other revisions.

The seasonally adjusted total nonfarm employment level for March 2025 was revised downward by 898,000. On a not seasonally adjusted basis, the total nonfarm employment level for March 2025 was revised downward by 862,000, or -0.5 percent. 

AS a result, the change in total nonfarm employment for 2025 was revised from +584,000 to +181,000 (seasonally adjusted), which means that the US barely generated any jobs in 2025, and that instead of creating 49K average jobs per month, the US only added 15K jobs. 

We will have more to say on the historic negative revisions shortly, but for now suffice to say, the picture is one of a much weaker jobs market, and the January bounce notwithstanding – and it won’t stand once it is revised lower – the Fed will have no choice but to slash rates aggressively to prevent the already precarious labor market from rolling over into contraction.