The Slow Demise of France’s Enduring Colonial Currency System in Africa?

There is a currency circulating across 14 African nations. Designed in Paris, printed in France, it required for decades that its users deposit up to half their foreign reserves in the French Treasury. Called the CFA franc (officially Communauté Financière Africaine, i.e. African Financial Community), it has operated continuously since 1945. The same instrument created to control and manage France's colonial possessions in sub-Saharan Africa still functions in many ways today. More than 155 million people use it; 14 formally sovereign nations depend on it. And the debate over whether it represents stability or subjugation has never been louder.

UEMOA + CEMAC + Comoros = CFA franc zone.

 

A country that controls another country's currency controls that economy. France understood this better than almost anyone. While the British pound zone dissolved France held on and the invisible scaffolding linking Paris to Dakar, Abidjan, Yaoundé and Libreville has never been dismantled.

Return to 1945. Europe lies in ruins. France, liberated from Nazi Germany, struggles to feed itself. Inflation spirals; the metropolitan franc loses value weekly. Across the Atlantic the Bretton Woods agreements establish the postwar financial order: the gold-backed dollar as global anchor, every nation required to declare its currency's value to the new IMF. France's shattered economy forces a sharp devaluation of the metropolitan franc against the dollar.

 

West African CFA franc—fiat bills with zero intrinsic value, backed

only by an ECB-mandated fixed exchange rate to the euro.

 

De Gaulle's finance minister Pleven applies different rates to the metropole and the colonies. In France the franc falls hard. In French West Africa, French Equatorial Africa, and the Comoros a new currency is born at a stronger rate: one CFA franc equals 1.7 metropolitan francs. By 1948 the ratio is two to one. The colonies suddenly possess a currency stronger than France's own.

Presented as generosity, the mechanics tell another story. A strong currency in a raw-material exporter that imports finished goods acts as an import subsidy and export tax. It cheapens French manufactures for the colony and makes the colony’s own goods less competitive abroad. From day one the CFA franc's pricing structure channeled African purchasing power toward French industry and quietly strangled the development of competitive local export sectors. Solid Rothschild architecture designed to endure.

A fixed exchange rate set below equilibrium creates excess demand for foreign currency

(Qd > Qs), which the central bank must cover by selling reserves to maintain the peg.

 

And its original name said everything: Colonies Françaises d’Afrique—French Colonies of Africa. No euphemism. Notes were printed then, and still are, in Chamalières by the Banque de France. Four pillars underpinned the system and proved remarkably durable: a fixed exchange rate with the French franc (later the euro) guaranteeing unlimited convertibility by the French Treasury; free capital movement between the CFA zone and France; and the operations account requiring the zone's central banks to deposit a large share of foreign-exchange reserves in the French Treasury.

At founding that share was 100 percent. By 1973 it fell to 65 percent; by 2005 to a 50 percent ceiling. Even at half, 'sovereign nations' handed over half their foreign exchange wealth to a former colonial power in exchange for a guarantee against currency collapse. Defenders cite stability: relatively low inflation compared with much of Africa, insulation from crises that wrecked Zimbabwe or Venezuela. Outside one massive 1994 devaluation the CFA franc has tracked the French franc and then the euro almost lockstep for nearly eighty years. But stability for whom, and at what cost?

Viral 2019 Italian TV clip of Giorgia Meloni (then opposition leader, now Prime Minister) holding a CFA franc note and calling it France's "colonial currency" to exploit resources via seigniorage and export controls.  

Pegged at 655.957 CFA francs to the euro, member states cannot adjust the exchange rate to their own conditions. They cannot devalue to boost exports, expand the money supply in a downturn, or set independent interest rates. Monetary policy—the core tool of any sovereign country—is outsourced to the European Central Bank, which sets policy for Germany, France and the Netherlands, not Senegal, Cameroon or Chad. In 2008 and again during the COVID-19 plandemic, countries with sovereign currencies printed money and cut rates; CFA countries could not.

Economists have long argued the franc is chronically overvalued relative to the productive capacity of its users. Overvaluation makes imports cheap and exports expensive—fine for comprador elites buying luxury goods in Paris, devastating for farmers selling cocoa or cotton against competitors with weaker, flexible currencies. The structural result is a permanent tilt toward importing rather than producing and deep dependence on foreign capital. This is a design feature, not an accident.

 

Olympio, murdered—like Kennedy—by the small hat money printers in 1963.

 

Sylvanus Olympio, first president of Togo, was elected in 1961 and immediately pushed to leave the CFA system and establish a national central bank. He saw monetary and political sovereignty as inseparable. On January 13, 1963, less than three years after independence, he was assassinated in a coup led by a French-trained sergeant. The new government proved far more amenable to French interests; Togo remained in the CFA zone. Leaders who challenge French economic control tend to meet violent ends or removal; those who cooperate enjoy long, French-supported tenures.

Sankara—radical anti-imperialist, pan-Africanist and austere leader

—prioritized self-reliance, massive social reforms, and integrity.

Murdered by the small hat money printers in 1987. 

The most iconic case is Thomas Sankara. In 1983, aged 33, he seized power in Upper Volta and renamed it Burkina Faso—"land of upright people." He ran mass vaccination campaigns, planted over ten million trees against desertification, banned female genital mutilation, appointed women to high office, refused air-conditioning, drove a modest Renault 5 and cut official salaries including his own. His greatest offense in Paris's eyes was open challenge to the CFA franc and Françafrique—the web of political, military and economic ties binding former colonies to France. On October 15, 1987 he was assassinated in a coup led by his deputy Blaise Compaoré, who then ruled the country for 27 years and reversed the anti-French course. In April 2022 a Burkinabe military tribunal convicted Compaoré and associates in absentia; Compaoré, living in exile in Ivory Coast, received a life sentence. The tribunal confirmed French agents were in Ouagadougou the day after the coup. Sankara's family formally accused France of masterminding the killing. Macron pledged in 2017 to declassify related documents; they have not been fully released.

Françafrique operates on a larger scale still: French bases, advisers inside ministries, preferential access for French firms to African resources, and the CFA franc as monetary backbone. Comprador elites enjoyed convertibility that let them move wealth to Paris, an overvalued currency that made luxury imports affordable, and French political and military protection. Ordinary citizens faced scarce credit, interest rates dictated by European conditions, import competition that crushed local firms, and capital mobility that functioned largely as a one-way valve outward.

France confronts rising anti-French sentiment in West Africa—Bamako,

Mali, 2020: "France get out" demonstration against French, EU and UN forces. 

By the late 1980s the franc was severely overvalued. Commodity prices—cocoa, coffee, cotton, oil—were falling while the French franc appreciated, dragging the CFA with it. On January 12, 1994 the CFA franc was devalued 50 percent overnight. The decision was taken in Paris, not in any African capital. French Prime Minister Édouard Balladur later confirmed it was done at France's instigation "to help these countries in their development." Overnight the purchasing power of roughly 150 million people was halved. Prices of imported food, medicine and fuel doubled; urban poverty surged; foreign-currency public debt effectively doubled. The cost fell entirely on African citizens who had no vote and no veto. The event laid bare the system's reality: sovereign in name, monetary dependencies in fact.

When France joined the euro in 1999 the CFA franc was pegged at 655.957 to the euro—a rate that still holds. The anchor changed; the dynamics did not. Monetary policy is now set by the European Central Bank for a union of wealthy European states with zero representation or accountability to the African economies bound to it. Notes continue to be printed in Chamalières; until recent reforms the operations accounts still funneled reserves to the French Treasury; French representatives sat on the boards of the BCEAO in Dakar and the BEAC in Yaoundé.

 

Rothschild stooge Macron arrives in Ivory Coast—for Christmas with his troops.

 

By the 2010s a new generation of African intellectuals and leaders challenged the system with growing force. Senegalese economist Ndongo Samba Sylla called the CFA franc "an anachronism requiring orderly elimination." In 2015 Chadian President Idriss Déby declared that a "cord preventing development in Africa" must be severed—everyone knew which cord. In 2019 Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni held up a CFA note on television and accused France of exploitation, an accusation that resonated widely.

 

In December 2019, under pressure, Macron and Ivory Coast's Alassane Ouattara announced reforms in Abidjan: the West African CFA franc would become the Eco; the 50 percent reserve deposit requirement would end; French board seats at the BCEAO would disappear; the operations account would close and reserves return to Dakar. Headlines called it historic. The fine print was more cautious: the fixed euro peg remained, French convertibility guarantee continued, and France retained a backup credit line. The most symbolically offensive features were removed; the macro-economically decisive peg stayed.

Muammar Gaddafi's African gold dinar was a 2009-2011 pan-African initiative to introduce a single, gold-backed currency aimed to replace the US dollar and the French-backed CFA franc across Africa, allowing nations to sell oil and resources for gold to achieve complete financial independence from Western systems. Murdered by the small hat money printers in 2011.

Critics call it rebranding. The name Eco had already been chosen for a broader ECOWAS common currency that would have included Nigeria; a francophone-only Eco complicated that project. The reforms covered only the eight West African states. The six Central African users of the BEAC franc—Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon—still deposit 50 percent of reserves in Paris and still have French board representation. As of today, the Eco has not launched; the latest ECOWAS target of 2027 is viewed with widespread skepticism.

Meanwhile the Sahel transformed. Coups between 2020 and 2023 toppled governments in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Guinea, each fueled in part by anti-French sentiment over military presence, European and US sponsored Jihadist terrorism, economic extraction and the CFA franc. In 2024 Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger left ECOWAS and formed the landlocked Alliance of Sahel States, explicitly rejecting French influence and discussing exit from the CFA franc toward national or shared Sahelian currencies. Chad and Senegal demanded withdrawal of French troops, Niger the retreat of the French and Americans. 

 

» The slave that cannot carry out his own revolt deserves no pity. «
Ibrahim Traoré, President of Burkina Faso.

 

Senegal's president Bassirou Diomaye Faye and his prime minister Ousmane Sonko campaigned in 2023 on economic sovereignty; Sonko declared in 2025 that the CFA franc is "both a symbolic and an economic problem." The cry "La France dégage" (France, get out!) has echoed from Niamey to Bamako to Ouagadougou to Dakar, encompassing French military bases, mining concessions and, above all, monetary sovereignty. The CFA franc had become the most visible symbol of unfinished decolonization.

» Jub, Jubal, Jubanti. «
(Be upright, act with integrity, and rectify what is crooked.)

Faye, elected president of Senegal in 2024, had expelled French troops by March 2025 and was

elected Chairman of ECOWAS in July 2026; however, Senegal has not left the CFA franc. Hello Eco...

What replaces it remains complicated. Exit without credible alternatives requires building central-bank capacity, reserve management, monetary-policy frameworks and market confidence from scratch. Countries that left earlier—Guinea in 1960, Madagascar and Mauritania in 1973—faced significant turbulence. Yet defenders must confront the system's record: the 14 CFA countries include some of the world's poorest; Niger, Chad, the Central African Republic and Burkina Faso rank near the bottom of the UN Human Development Index; per-capita GDP remains a fraction of the global average. Eighty years of promised stability have not delivered development, poverty reduction or structural transformation. The question is no longer only whether these countries can afford to leave, but whether they can afford to stay.

 

Why would-should-could all these countries remain in the CFA franc zone? 

A monetary system whose notes are printed in France, whose reserves have historically been held in the French Treasury, whose exchange rate is set by a European institution, and in which the actual users long had no meaningful say, was designed under colonialism, preserved through co-optation, coercion and violence, and maintained by institutional inertia and the complicity of local comprador elites who benefit. 

 

At no point in history has the CFA franc been closer to its demise, just coinciding with the scheduled 2027 rollout of the

Eco—the proposed new ECOWAS common currency, directly pegged to the Euro. Again. One couldn't make this up.

And it just sounds, looks, and smells as fantastic and promising as the Euro...

 

The CFA franc is a monument to the idea that independence can be granted with one hand while economic sovereignty is withheld with the other. The most effective control is not always exercised with guns and borders; sometimes it is exercised with exchange rates, reserve requirements and banknotes printed thousands of kilometers from the pockets that carry them.

 

Whether or when the CFA franc system collapses, adapts once more as the Eco, national sovereign currencies, or something else remains open. What is clear is that a reckoning is already under way across the Sahel and beyond. A new generation asks the question Sankara asked four decades ago: "If a nation does not control its own money, can it truly call itself free?"

 

Reference: 
Enrico Creta (2026) - The CFA Franc and the Mechanics of Monetary Servitude in Francophone Africa.
Alassane Dialloa Dego & Adama Bac (2024) - From French franc to euro: An economic impact for CFA franc zone countries?
Fanny Pigeaud & Ndongo Samba Sylla (2021) - Africa's Last Colonial Currency: The CFA Franc Story.

2026 Global Favorability Flips: China Overtakes US | Pew Research Center

The Pew Research Center's "Spring 2026 Global Attitudes Survey" marks a clear inflection point. As stated in its July 15 report: "Views of China have improved in recent years while opinions of the US have worsened, to the point where China is now seen more positively than the US in most of 36 countries surveyed." Across the 20 countries tracked every year since 2023, the median favorable rating of the United States has fallen to 36 percent while China's has risen to 46 percent. The survey of 42,151 adults, conducted February 8–May 13, 2026, shows the reversal is no longer marginal.

 

2026 Updated Scatter Plot – Key Changes from Spring 2025: The Spring 2026 data shows a clear structural shift: The Top-Left "pro-US / negative China" cluster has shrunk. It is now mainly limited to Israel (still very high US favorability), Japan (China only 11%), South Korea, India, and Poland. The Bottom-Right "pro-China / negative or lower US" cluster has expanded dramatically and is now the dominant zone. Canada (China 44% / US 33%) and Mexico (China 59% / US 40%) have fully crossed into this quadrant. Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan (near 90% China), and many middle-income countries sit firmly here. A large group of European and other high-income countries have drifted downward (lower US) and rightward (higher China), filling the lower-middle and bottom-right areas. The old US-centric top-left concentration has eroded, while the pro-China bottom-right has become the new gravitational center of global public opinion.

A scatter of national favorability ratings now places the large majority of countries in the zone where China outranks the United States. The extremes are stark. In Pakistan, 90 percent hold a favorable view of China—a staggering +75-point advantage over the United States. Malaysia posts a +56-point gap, Indonesia +48, and several other Asia-Pacific and Middle Eastern publics show double-digit leads for China. At the opposite extreme, only 11 percent of Japanese adults view China favorably. The United States retains a clear edge in just six countries: India, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, Israel (where 81 percent rate the US favorably), and Poland.

 You can choose your friends, not your neighbors.

The shift is driven by simultaneous movements in both directions. Pew notes that "China being assessed more positively than the US is a relatively recent shift in most countries surveyed. This reversal in favorability is often driven by shifting views of both superpowers: improving views of China coupled with worsening views of the US" Canada offers one of the cleanest illustrations: "a majority of Canadians (57%) had a positive view of the US in 2023, while 14% viewed China positively. In 2025, Canadians were equally favorable toward the US and China. Now, more Canadians have a favorable view of China (44%) than the US (33%)." Parallel reversals appear across much of Europe and Latin America. Americans' nearest neighbors—Canadians and Mexicans—"also view China more positively than the US." 

 

How people in 36 countries view the US and China
(5 who have favorable opinion of ...).

 

In many countries, the US-China favorability gap has reversed. 

Regional and demographic patterns sharpen the picture. Views of China are closely linked to national income: people in middle-income countries across Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and parts of South and Southeast Asia tend to hold far more positive opinions, while those in high-income European and East Asian nations remain more skeptical. Within the Asia-Pacific region itself the contrast is extreme—nine-in-ten Pakistanis see China favorably, compared with just 11 percent of Japanese adults. In Latin America, several publics that once clearly preferred the United States are now evenly split or lean toward China.

 

CNN: Global opinion for the US plummets by 79% since it

began its war on Iran. Only country hated more is Israel.  

 

Age divides reinforce the longer-term momentum. In nearly every country surveyed, adults under 35 express significantly more favorable views of China than those over 50. Even inside the United States, younger Americans are markedly less likely to hold "very unfavorable" opinions of China than the oldest generation. The generational gap appears consistently across high-income and middle-income publics alike, suggesting the current shift may deepen rather than reverse.

 
Confidence in the two presidents tracks the same regional and demographic contours. "While many people still lack confidence in Xi, positive views of him have become more widespread, and more overall now say they have confidence in Xi than in Trump." Across the continuously tracked countries, median confidence in Chinese President Xi Jinping now exceeds that in US President Donald Trump. In most European nations, Xi leads Trump by double-digit margins even though absolute confidence remains modest—the highest reading for Xi is just 37 percent in the United Kingdom. In Mexico the disparity is especially sharp: confidence in Trump sits near single digits while confidence in Xi is several times higher. Trump retains an edge mainly among China's immediate neighbors—India, Japan, and the Philippines.

 

POTUS 47—Wrecking Ball to the Empire.

 

In middle-income countries the contrast on foreign-policy roles is sharper still. "People in 17 middle-income countries raise more concerns about the United States' foreign policy than China's. A median of 75% say that the US interferes in the affairs of other countries a great deal or a fair amount, while 45% say the same of China. In nearly every country surveyed, more people see the US as an interferer than China." South Africa illustrates the practical consequence: 72 percent call China a reliable partner versus 46 percent for the United States, and the share saying China contributes to peace and stability has risen from 47 percent in 2023 to 64 percent in 2026. In Pakistan the reliability gap reaches 84 percent for China versus 36 percent for the United States; in the Philippines the reverse holds (81 percent versus 42 percent).

 
One residual American advantage remains on personal freedoms. "More say the US government respects the personal freedoms of its people than say the same of the Chinese government." Yet the gap is closing rapidly. "People in nearly every country surveyed have become less likely to say the US government respects its people's personal freedoms" since 2021. In Sweden the figure has plunged from 61 percent to 27 percent; drops of 25 points or more also registered in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, South Korea, and Spain. In Mexico the numbers have already flipped: roughly one-third say China respects personal freedoms while only 20 percent say the same of the United States.

 

» The reversal is no longer marginal. «

 

While "fortresses" of pro-American sentiment remain—Israel, the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, India, and Poland—the Spring 2026 data show a world that has moved decisively from a US-led consensus toward a more fragmented reality. China's economic and diplomatic influence is increasingly welcomed, especially in middle-income regions and among younger cohorts. The extremes of the favorability map now run from 90 percent positive in Pakistan to 11 percent in Japan, with the United States holding majority favorability in only a handful of places.

 

Reference:
Pew Research Center (July 15, 2026) - People in many countries now view China more positively than the US.
Pew Research Center (July 15, 2026) - Views of China and Xi Are Improving Globally. 
Pew Research Center (June 23, 2026) - Trump Gets Negative Reviews Internationally as Fewer Say US Is a Reliable Partner.

See also:

Pew Research Center (July 15, 2025) - Views of the US have worsened while opinions of China have improved.

Iran's Methodical Gutting of US Power in West Asia | Pepe Escobar

The ways Iran is dismantling the entire American military ecosystem across West Asia with an extremely disciplined strategy are something to behold. The whole CENTCOM support infrastructure is devastatingly fair game: from costly early warning radars to full air defense systems; from hangars to logistics hubs; from fuel and ammunition storage to forward operating bases; from naval and maritime surveillance assets to intel collection and communications nodes. [...] Iran knows where everything is located—to the millimeter. No need to go for flashy photo ops, Shock'n Awe-style, monopolizing the news cycle. What matters is the Chinese torture of steadily degrading the enemy's capabilities; the strategy is painfully methodical and painfully precise.

 

» Hitting one of those sitting ducks is being kept for the appropriate time. «

   

[...] The Iranian Way of War is a sophisticated mix that may eventually be studied in Western military academies. All logically interconnected—from destruction of enemy support infrastructure to steady degradation of intel, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities; from attrition of air defense and interceptor inventories to widespread disruption of logistics. And all that is supremely cost-effective—but certainly not for the attacking Empire, as every malfunctioning Patriot costs millions of dollars and simply cannot defend scores of different locations simultaneously.

» Iranian Way of War may eventually be studied in Western military academies. «

 

[...] In the bigger picture, the Russia-China-Iran interlocking strategic Eurasia partnerships remain in full effect. That's Russia-China in practice supporting the Axis of Resistance. Iran uses the Russian Murmansk system—inexorably jamming GPS and blinding US/Israeli missiles. Iran also uses Chinese BeiDou—the equivalent of GPS, unjammable by the Americans and rendering precision to the centimeter to Iranian missiles and drones. And Iran uses the Russian Kometa: electronic chips equipping missiles and drones wreaking havoc on American electronic warfare.

 

» Just check the satellite images. «

 

In a nutshell: this is how a systematic degradation of the whole regional architecture that allows the US and its vassals to project military power across West Asia looks. Played out in front of the whole Global South. The manual is available for all, live, in real time. [...] Iran's precision, restraint, and reach are shutting up the whole vociferating spectacle emanating from the Empire of Narratives, as Iranian missiles and drones relentlessly strike fighter jets, Black Hawks, data centers, logistics depots, power plants—and more.

Desperate Zionist jingoism.

 

The Global South just needs to check the satellite images of proverbial craters across Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and the UAE. And Iran hasn't even started yet. Were Iran to obliterate Qatar’s remaining LNG trains, that would leave most of the planet with no LNG from Doha for at least a decade—not to mention the helium for making microchips.

 

Hello, ground invasion: Iran to receive QW-12 and FN-16 MANPADS from China.

The massive humiliation of hitting and disabling one of those multibillion-dollar sitting ducks is being kept for the appropriate time. And as everyone knows, Iran runs the clock, and time is on its side. None of that, of course, minimizes the risks of the escalation ladder; and we are still in the middle of what could become the Mother of All Escalation Ladders.

Quoted from:
Pepe Escobar (July 29, 2026) - The deaf, dumb and blind Empire of Piracy. 

 

"Iran Will Make Sure the US Economy Is Destroyed" | Foad Izadi

Iranian Professor Foad Izadi of the Department of American Studies at the University of Tehran’s Faculty of World Studies has just laid out the clearest statement yet of Iran’s official current thinking. After failed talks and repeated US aggression, a growing number of voices inside Iran no longer believe diplomacy can work. Iran’s answer is simple and brutal: raise the cost until the American economy itself is broken.

» Make sure the US economy is destroyed while Trump is the president. « 

 

That is the explicit goal now being discussed. Take 20 percent of the oil coming from the region, and prices stay high for at least two years. High oil prices for two years mean the end of Trump, the end of his presidency, and the end of the American economy—three goals at the same time.

» There is no diplomatic solution. Only a military solution. «

 

Negotiations have failed for more than 20 years. Every time Iran sat at the table, the US bombed the table. The problem with the US, therefore, has no diplomatic solution. It has a military solution. Continued attacks are needed to cause enough pain so this never happens again, and military deterrence is restored.

 

» They will go thirsty! «

Iran's plan to evict 50,000 US troops. 
 

Iran’s target list: oil facilities, hit hard enough that repairs take a long time; desalination plants that supply 98 percent of the water for Gulf countries. With 50,000 US troops in the region, if those countries lose water, the troops have no choice but to leave and drink water back home in America.

Why this level of force? For 46 years after the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US never attacked Iran the way it is attacking now. Only in the last year did the attacks intensify because Washington believed it could handle the cost. Iranians are tired of being hit every few weeks, losing civilians and infrastructure. Enough is enough. The cost so far has not been high enough. Trump keeps attacking. The equation must change.

 

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claims to have inflicted well over 200 US military fatalities across targeted bases in Bahrain, Kuwait, and Jordan, with waves of missiles overwhelming and effectively neutralizing billion-dollar US defense infrastructure.

America ends wars when its politicians finally realize they made a mistake. That is how US wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan ended. Either the executive branch or Congress concludes the price is too high, and the funding ends. 

» The President of the United States wants to give Iran's frozen assets to companies and countries that have suffered damage in the war. From now on, we announce that any company or country that accepts this proposal will never be allowed to transit the Strait of Hormuz. «

Iran's Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaqari, July 28, 2026.

The same logic is now being applied: force the realization that the current policy is destroying the US economy, and the policy will change. Iran has decided that only the language of force works. Raise the economic cost high enough, for long enough, and the United States will be forced to stop. This is no longer about limited deterrence. This is about breaking the American economy while Trump is still in office.

Reference:
Foad Izadi (July 28, 2026) - "They Will Go Thirsty": Prof. Izadi Reveals Iran's Plan to Evict 50,000 US Troops. (video)
Foad Izadi (July 28, 2026) - "Make Sure The US Economy Is Detroyed": Prof. Izadi’s Warning To The US. (video) 

July 29, 2026: Iranian civil defense teams have miraculously rescued two children, transporting them to a hospital on Qeshm Island, as the search continues for three others trapped under the rubble from the latest US terror attack. How was this a legitimate target? The war crimes keep piling up as the US becomes more desperate.

Al-Aqsa Triangle: Hormuz, Bab al-Mandeb, and Suez Chokepoints

Following the partial disruption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab al-Mandeb Strait is emerging as a second potential global energy chokepoint. The Ansar Allah movement (Houthis) in Yemen has announced an initial naval blockade targeting Saudi vessels, citing the long-standing Saudi air and sea blockade of Yemen. 

Al-Aqsa Triangle: Yemen–Iran strategy to disrupt global trade
by closing the Middle East's three key maritime chokepoints.

Bab al-Mandeb links the Suez–Red Sea corridor to the Indian Ocean and, alongside Hormuz, forms a dual chokepoint system vulnerable to escalation via Iran-aligned actors. A simultaneous disruption would block roughly a quarter of global energy flows and a large share of Asia–Europe trade, with Hormuz carrying 27% of seaborne oil and 20% of LNG, and the Bab al-Mandeb/Suez corridor each handling 11% of global trade and 8% of LNG. 

The Bab al-Mandeb is not yet fully closed. Commercial traffic continues, but the corridor is operating under elevated threat conditions. Attacks on selected vessels have increased, producing selective disruption rather than a comprehensive blockade. In response, some shipping lines are rerouting around the Cape of Good Hope, while others continue transit under heightened security measures, including naval presence and route adjustments. In response to constraints at Hormuz, Saudi Arabia has shifted a significant share of exports to the Red Sea port of Yanbu, where approximately 4 million barrels of crude are loaded daily. Roughly 3 million barrels per day are destined for Asian markets and transit the Bab al-Mandeb.

American worthless signature: The repeated breaches of the agreement by the Great Satan regarding the MOU signed by the Presidents of Iran and the US have once again laid bare a fundamental truth: the signature of the US President is utterly worthless and devoid of credibility. It further reaffirms that coercion and brutality are inseparable components of the US creed and doctrine. Imam Sayyid Mojtaba Khamenei, July 17, 2026.

Rerouting via the Cape of Good Hope adds 6,000 km (3,700 miles) and 10–14 days transit time, in some cases longer. This materially increases fuel, charter, and operating costs. War-risk insurance premiums for Red Sea transit have also surged, adding several hundred thousand USD per voyage. Escalation risk centers on a full blockade scenario. If Ansar Allah forces interdict all international shipping, not just Saudi vessels, the impact would be significantly greater.

 

Strategic Trade Significance: Hormuz vs. Bab al-Mandeb

Hormuz concentrates unmatched upstream energy dependency, funneling roughly 20% of global oil (17–20 million bpd), over 20% of LNG, and a decisive share of global helium vital for high-tech and medical supply chains. Because Saudi and UAE pipeline bypasses cover only a fraction of normal volumes, any disruption creates an immediate physical supply deficit—driving rapid oil and gas repricing with direct spillovers into petrochemicals, fertilizers, and industrial inputs.

Bab al-Mandeb anchors throughput rather than production, serving as the southern gateway to Suez. It carries 12–15% of global trade, including major Asia–Europe container traffic, dry bulk, and mid-single-digit million bpd of oil. Unlike Hormuz, these flows can be rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope, though doing so adds roughly 6,000 km, 10–14 days, and sharp increases in fuel costs, vessel utilization constraints, freight rates, and war-risk premiums.

Consequently, their economic transmission mechanisms diverge. Hormuz is a quantity shock that removes physical supply and forces immediate energy repricing. Bab al-Mandeb is a friction shock that preserves supply but degrades delivery efficiency, triggering broader, slower-moving inflation across manufactured goods, energy derivatives, and food. Fertilizer markets sit at the intersection, relying on Hormuz for Gulf ammonia and urea to exit, and on Bab al-Mandeb for efficient delivery to European and African markets.

Simultaneous impairment escalates systemic risk nonlinearly. Upstream supply contraction combines with downstream logistical breakdown, eliminating volume availability and transit efficiency at once. This dual constraint compresses global inventories, amplifies price volatility, and propagates cost increases across industrial inputs and consumer goods with minimal buffering capacity.

The Bab al-Mandeb handles thousands of commercial transits annually and links the Indian Ocean to the Red Sea and Suez Canal—one of the world's critical trade corridors. Full closure would force large-scale rerouting around Africa, extending delivery times, increasing freight rates and insurance costs, and placing renewed stress on global supply chains.  

 

July 21, 2026: Iran Destroys F-15 Hanger Base, 100 US Troops Lost as Trump Panics.

Cost transmission effects would likely be broad-based. Higher transport costs would feed into fuel prices (gasoline, diesel, heating oil), airfares, food, consumer goods, and imported products. Firms would absorb higher logistics and energy costs, with partial pass-through to end consumers.

July 21, 2026: Bab al-Mandeb Strait Becomes New Shipping Flashpoint as Houthis Signal Blockade.

 

The EU is engaged via Operation Aspides with a mandate limited to protecting civilian shipping. The US and the UK are conducting separate military strikes against targets in Yemen. Historical precedent indicates limited containment success: prior multinational naval deployments with dozens of warships failed to durably constrain Ansar Allah capabilities. Current Ansar Allah systems include even more advanced drones and missiles than in 2025.

Zero Exits: Houthis Blockade Saudi Arabia. 

 

A concurrent escalation in Bab al-Mandeb alongside sustained tension in the Strait of Hormuz would affect the region's two principal energy and trade corridors simultaneously, posing a high-risk scenario for global economic disruption and upward pressure on energy, transport, and consumer prices.