Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us
In March I published an article titled “Global Energy Crisis Or Iranian Surrender In Five Weeks?” in which I outlined the “worst case” and “best case” scenarios for the war in Iran. In my best case scenario I argued in favor of a specific plan to end the conflict quickly: A US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, flipping the tables on Iran by blocking or seizing any oil tankers or gas tankers which exit Iranian ports.
Two weeks later, the Trump Administration has implemented this exact strategy.
The effectiveness of the blockade is already apparent; the propaganda bots on social media are scrambling to find a narrative to counter it, but they are failing. Why? Because Iran already tried to lock down the strait (which is an international waterway), and any government cheering (or secretly cheering) for Iran’s actions is now unable to make a rational argument against the US doing the same thing to Iran. As I noted in March:
“We constantly hear about international exposure to the Hormuz shutdown, but the media rarely mentions that Iran is the MOST exposed economy of all. For now, Iranian oil ships continue to pass through the strait and these vessels are Iran’s economic lifeline. Strategic estimates suggest that without the steady passage of these oil tankers, the Iranian economy would completely collapse within five weeks…”
I then summarized what I believed was the simplest solution to end the war:
“Iranian cargo ships can be targeted for seizure by a US blockade of the Persian Gulf well away from the narrow waters of the Hormuz. The ships could be destroyed, but I suspect the Department of Defense will try to avoid oil spills and ecological disasters. Instead, the best option is to capture Iran’s tankers and then redirect the oil to countries in danger of shortages.
Iran has the option of shutting off GPS tracking for their vessels (shadow fleet), but this would not help them maneuver past a comprehensive US blockade. In other words, I argue that the US could turn the tables on Iran and use their reliance on the Hormuz against them.
With Iran’s economy in shambles, they will no longer be able to purchase missiles or drones for resupply from Russia and China. They won’t be able to pay for logistic resources for their military and they won’t be able to contain public unrest. The Iranians would be forced to negotiate and the war would be over quickly with minimal risk to US troops.”
For now, the US is not seizing Iran’s tankers and is merely sending them back to where they came from. However, it would seem that the Trump Administration and their military advisers have come to the same basic conclusions I did.
For years I have expressed my concerns about a potential conflict in Iran, largely because of the precarious global economic risks associated with mass energy shortages caused by a closure of the Hormuz, which transits around 25% of the world’s energy exports. That said, I do not care about “picking sides” when it comes to Israel or Iran.
This debate is irrelevant and designed, I think, to divide US conservatives over ancient tribal vendettas that do not involve us. I don’t care about the Israeli government or “Zionism” and I certainly don’t care what happens to the theocratic and tyrannical Muslim regime in Iran. We have much more important things to think about.
What matters to me is how the US and the American people are affected by geopolitical events. There has been endless debate on what the war is really about, whether it be Iranian nukes, Israeli schemes, Saudi schemes, control of global oil markets, etc. (I think every action the Trump Administration has take so far from Venezuela to Iran has largely been designed to contain China). In any case, a long term closure of the Hormuz will eventually result in market cascades and a stagflationary crisis.
What matters now is ending the war as quickly and decisively as possible without leaving the Homuz and 25% of global energy exports under Iran’s control. After that, people can wrestle over the “moral and constitutional” quandary to their heart’s content.
First, I think it’s vitally important to address some lies and disinformation being spread by propagandists and foreign agents online about the US blockade, so let’s quickly go down the list…
Lie #1: The US Is Blocking All Ships Traveling Through The Strait
This is false. The US is only blocking ships coming from Iranian ports. All other ships have been allowed to pass without incident. This lie is being spread by disinfo agents all over social media and it is also being spread by foreign governments from the UK to France to China. This, to me, says A LOT about the true agenda of these countries, given that they said little or nothing about Iran locking down the strait.
Lie #2: Chinese Vessels Have Broken The Blockade And The US Is Afraid
Nope. All Chinese vessels coming from Iranian ports have been turned away and any vessels coming from alternative ports have been allowed to pass. At the time this article is being published, only one ship from an Iranian port has allegedly slipped through the blockade, though the story on this ship might be fabricated. All other Iranian ships have been repelled.
Lie #3: The Blockade Puts US Naval Ships At Serious Risk
No, it does the opposite. US ships have no need to traverse the narrow Hormuz to blockade it. All they have to do is wait outside of it and turn back Iranian tankers that approach. No mines, no missiles, no drones, no tiny attack boats, nothing Iran has the ability to deploy has much of a chance of harming the US Navy. In fact, reports indicate ships like the USS Abraham Lincoln (an aircraft carrier) have already been targeted hundreds of times by Iran with no damage taken.
There is nothing Iran can do about a comprehensive blockade.
Lie #4: Iran Is Used To Sanctions And Can Hold Out Longer Than The US
No, they can’t. Only 7% of energy exports going to the US travel through the Hormuz. Iran’s entire economy hangs by a thin thread and that thread is oil exports to countries like China or Vietnam.
Iran is reportedly losing around $430 million each day that their ships remain stuck in the strait, and they have already taken around $270 billion in infrastructure damages. Iran pays for new weapons and military logistics with oil revenues. Their soldiers are paid in part with oil revenues. They mitigate civil unrest with oil revenues.
I suspect that the blockade will force Iran back into negotiations within a couple weeks. That’s how little time they have left.
Lie #5: Iran Has Alternative Ways To Bypass The Blockade
No, they don’t. Overland routes without ample pipelines are no substitute for the ease of oil tanker shipments. Even if they did have such pipelines, those lines could be easily destroyed.
By extension, as Iran’s oil exports stack up they will quickly run out of storage space, which means they will have to shut down drilling. This would cause significant damage to their oil infrastructure within weeks due to pressure differentials.
Recent news indicates that Iran has already halted all petrochemical exports until further notice. If true, this proves that the blockade is highly effective.
Lie #6: The Chinese Will Intervene And Force The Strait To Reopen
As noted, the strait is not closed. Only Iranian ports are closed. Furthermore, China has stayed away from direct intervention in the Hormuz because they simply don’t have the naval capacity to square off with the US even if they wanted to.
Keep in mind, only a week ago the Chinese government vetoed a UN resolution to reopen the strait when they thought Iran was going to control it. The CCP is impotent and they can do nothing.
Lie #7: The US Is Losing All Its Allies Over The Blockade
Wrong. What the blockade (and the war in general) is doing is exposing the countries which were pretending to be our allies when it was convenient. I examined this problem in my last article “The US Separation From Europe And NATO Is Long Overdue”, and this brings me to my final point on the war.
The fact that the European elites are suddenly so concerned with the US blockade, enough to call for a “coalition” to reopen the strait and “circumvent” the US, tells us all we need to know. I continue to believe that the globalists in these nations have been feeding off the US while at the same time organizing a “multicultural alliance” behind the scenes – A socialist new world order to supplant western civilization and leave the US behind as a husk.
Part of this agenda clearly involves a partnership with Islamic fundamentalists as a goon squad to oppress native western populations. This is why the elites have flooded Europe with third world migrants – Ignoring the concerns of citizens and even arresting people who speak out.
This is also why the Pope is so adamant to call for a Muslim/Christian pact (while he blatantly ignores the fact that Europeans have been terrorized by Muslim immigrants for over a decade). Let’s not forget that during the pandemic lockdowns, the Vatican joined with the globalists to form the Council for Inclusive Capitalism (run by Lynn Forester de Rothschild). Modern-era Popes are not friends to conservatives or Christians, but I plan to go into that problem in my next article.
The blockade, I believe, is so effective that it has struck fear in Iran, fear in China, and fear in the liberal order in Europe which was counting on the war to drag on for months or years. Look at how angry they all are that Trump flipped the script on the Hormuz? Why all the emotion and irrational hand wringing after the strait has been opened to MORE ships and oil traffic? Why all the panic when oil prices are falling? It doesn’t make sense unless they WANT the US to fail.
Regardless of how you might feel personally about the Iran war, it is undeniable that the situation has revealed many of our supposed allies as enemies. In reality, they were always enemies. The only thing that has changed is that the truth is finally out in the open.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
Tyler Durden Thu, 04/16/2026 - 07:25Authored by Nate Kostar via CoinTelegraph.com,
Goldman Sachs has filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to launch a Bitcoin-linked exchange-traded fund designed to generate income while limiting exposure to the cryptocurrency’s volatility, according to a preliminary prospectus dated April 14.
The proposed Goldman Sachs Bitcoin Premium Income ETF would aim to deliver current income alongside capital appreciation by investing primarily in spot Bitcoin exchange-traded products (ETPs) and related options, rather than holding Bitcoin directly.
The fund would generate yield by selling call options on Bitcoin-linked ETPs, a strategy that can produce premium income but may cap upside in rising markets.
According to the filing, the actively managed fund would maintain at least 80% exposure to Bitcoin-linked assets and could allocate as much as 25% of its holdings through a Cayman Islands subsidiary, a structure commonly used to gain commodities exposure under the US Investment Company Act.
The fund expects to vary its options “overwrite” strategy — that is, selling call options against its holdings — between roughly 40% and 100% of its Bitcoin exposure depending on market conditions, and may distribute a significant portion of returns as income or return of capital.
It would gain exposure through a mix of spot Bitcoin ETPs and derivatives, combining direct holdings with options-based positions. The strategy may perform better in flat or moderately rising markets but could underperform during strong rallies as upside is capped.
Eric Balchunas, ETF analyst at Bloomberg, described the product as “Boomer Candy” in a post on X, suggesting the structure may appeal to investors seeking income and lower volatility over full upside exposure.
Source: Eric Balchunas
Separately, Goldman Chair and CEO David Solomon told analysts on Monday that the company last week closed on its acquisition of Innovator Capital Management, an issuer of defined outcome exchange-traded funds. The addition of Innovator’s 170 ETFs puts Goldman in the top 10 of global active ETF providers, Solomon said on the first-quarter earnings call.
Active crypto ETFs gain traction as strategies evolve beyond price trackingThe filing from Goldman Sachs comes as asset managers move beyond basic price-tracking crypto funds, with more complex and actively managed strategies gaining traction across the ETF market.
In January, Bitwise Asset Management launched an actively managed ETF designed to hedge against currency debasement.
The fund allocates across assets including Bitcoin, precious metals and mining equities, reflecting a broader push to integrate digital assets into diversified, macro-focused portfolios.
In March, T. Rowe Price amended its filing with the SEC for a proposed actively managed crypto ETF that would invest directly in digital assets.
The updated prospectus outlines a portfolio that may include assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and Solana.
Fund issuer 21Shares is also expanding into more sophisticated strategies. In February, the company launched a Europe-listed ETP tied to Strategy’s preferred stock (STRC), offering exposure to a yield-generating instrument linked to the company’s Bitcoin-focused capital strategy.
Speaking to Cointelegraph, 21Shares President Duncan Moir said the shift reflects broader demand for more advanced products, noting that crypto is “particularly well-suited to active management.”
“Why Active ETFs Are Gaining Momentum as Investors Seek New Solutions.” Source: Goldmansachs.com
According to a March report compiled by Morningstar and Goldman Sachs Asset Management, active ETFs held nearly $1.8 trillion in assets globally at the end of 2025, with flows significantly outpacing passive products.
Tyler Durden Thu, 04/16/2026 - 07:20