The Pattern Repeats

Proxy wars, narrative pivots, and the cycles we keep reliving

I’ve been watching the latest shifts in global alliances—Israel, Iran, China, the U.S.—and something familiar has started to take shape. Not just as current events, but as echoes of a much longer pattern.

We often think of geopolitics as reactive. One country does something, another responds. But when I zoom out, just like I do with macroeconomic cycles, I begin to see a rhythm. It appears as a repetition with the same structure, but different storylines.

And it’s not just the events that repeat. It’s the way we tell the story.

---

🌍 One Enemy at a Time

Since the end of World War II, it seems the United States has always needed a villain. The Cold War gave us the first post-war antagonist: communism. But the real battles weren’t fought in Russia or America. They unfolded across the Global South, in poor nations caught between ideologies, used as testing grounds for new forms of warfare and influence. First nuclear, then space gave us a place to advance our technologies that began as weaponry and resulted in commercial use.

Then in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell and by 1991, the Soviet Union officially dissolved, closing a chapter of global overt tension between capitalism and communism. But instead of retreating from global conflict, the West pivoted. That same period marked the beginning of a new era with Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait and the subsequent launch of Operation Desert Storm in early 1991. The geopolitical focus shifted swiftly to the Middle East, where strategic interests in energy security and access to vital oil reserves took center stage. This region, rich in resources and shaped by complex histories, became the new frontier for military action and also for advancing technologies in surveillance, cyber warfare, and communications. The enemy, too, was redefined. No longer a rival superpower but decentralized actors framed as terrorist threats. And yet, the narrative remained the same, simplified into binaries of good and evil, order and chaos, while the deeper structures of control and influence evolved underneath.

And now, it feels like the next pivot is here.

---

🧭 The Next Cycle Begins

In just a matter of days, long-held enemies become “misunderstood partners,” while new threats are positioned to take their place. Iran, after decades of antagonism, is suddenly spoken of with nuance—“a people with a bad government.” Old tensions dissolve when a bigger threat emerges.

China now sits firmly in that narrative seat. They have the scale, the tech, the global reach. And, perhaps most importantly, they are distant enough, abstract enough, for a new storyline to unfold. We know the arc by now: one villain at a time. Not to create peace, but to make space for the next conflict.

China’s Belt and Road initiative has created global footholds from Africa to Latin America. It provides ready-made theaters for proxy engagement. And in places like Taiwan and the South China Sea, the stage is already being set.

What strikes me is how efficiently these cycles are written. Just enough fear, just enough framing, to pull attention and resources into the next long game.

---

🔁 Same Playbook, New Players

I find myself wondering: have we ever actually made peace?
Not just treaties or trade deals—but reconciliation. The kind that breaks the pattern.

Russia is still viewed with suspicion, despite the Cold War ending over 30 years ago. Will the same be true of the Middle East after this cycle? Will we carry the narrative forward even after the incentives change?

Maybe that’s the part that sticks with me most: that our global relationships aren’t just shaped by need or fear, but by the stories we never fully let go of.

---

🧠 A Different Lens

But something else feels different this time.

More people are traveling. Listening. Learning that the “enemy” isn’t always who we’re told it is. That on the other side of the border is often someone with the same worries, the same dreams. And more of us are starting to question who benefits when the story is reduced to heroes and villains.

There’s a quote I heard recently, often attributed to Elon Musk:
“War happens when old men who dislike each other send young men to kill those they don’t dislike.”

It’s blunt. But it opens a wider reflection.

Maybe conflict isn’t just about ideology. Maybe it’s about energy—how collective emotion gets directed when uncertainty becomes too uncomfortable to hold. Fear, patriotism, outrage… these are efficient tools for mobilizing people when logic and collaboration feel too slow. Too uncertain. Too inconclusive.

It occurs to me that we may have built entire systems—not just political, but economic and social—on this quiet assumption: that some level of conflict is necessary to keep things moving. To define identity. To provide momentum. Because without an enemy, the question becomes far more difficult: what would we build together, if we weren’t preparing for war?

---

🔮 What Happens If We See the Pattern?

It occurs to me that each cycle gets more efficient. The narratives more refined. The tech more sophisticated. And yet the result is the same: we funnel creativity and capital into the next arms race - military, cyber, or now, AI.

But what if we saw the cycle while still inside it?

What if we stopped just reacting to the cast of characters and started questioning the script?

That, to me, is the challenge of this moment—not to pick a side, but to notice the rhythm. To step back and ask: Why this narrative? Why now? And who does it serve?

Because once you see the pattern, you can choose whether to keep weaving it.

---

💹 Macro Patterns, Regional Shifts, and Portfolio Implications

Zooming out, I can’t help but notice how this geopolitical pivot aligns with the late phase of the 18.6-year property and credit cycles, Phil Anderson outlines. We’re approaching what he calls the “blow-off top”—a moment of exuberance near the cycle’s end when governments often inject new capital into defense, technology, and infrastructure, just as global tensions rise.

We’ve seen this before.

In the early 2000s, the War on Terror drove trillions in spending—not just militarily, but also into telecoms, surveillance systems, and cyber infrastructure. That capital flowed disproportionately to U.S. companies, especially those positioned for security, energy, and tech expansion.

Now, it seems the stage is being set again—but with China as the narrative counterweight.

As the U.S. repositions its alliances, many of the same spending dynamics appear to be unfolding—this time potentially centered around semiconductors, AI, rare earths, and supply chain resilience. These are no longer just market sectors; they’re geopolitical tools. Which makes them increasingly subject to policy, risk, and regional volatility. But also to opportunity for investors if you choose to take advantage.

So what does that mean for portfolio positioning?

We often think of markets as rational or data-driven, but investment tends to follow emotion and story, especially at the geopolitical level. Countries that align with the prevailing narrative of “stability,” “progress,” or “strategic partnership” often receive a tailwind of capital, trade access, and diplomatic favor. Others, cast as threats or wild cards, face sanctions, divestment, and reputational risk. We’ve seen this play out with increasing clarity in recent years.

What’s particularly striking now is the role of the Middle East. In a matter of months, we’ve seen a thawing of rhetoric, new alliances forming, and significant capital flowing into U.S.-based investments in real estate, private equity, and infrastructure. Sovereign wealth funds from the Gulf are no longer just seeking financial returns, they’re buying influence, access, and long-term footholds. It’s not a coincidence. It’s a pattern.

As the geopolitical spotlight shifts to Asia, particularly China, the Middle East becomes a necessary partner. Past narratives are set aside to make room for new deals. And the capital follows accordingly. In many ways, this reinforces Phil Anderson’s cycle as we approach the peak. Nations and investors alike will race to position themselves for whatever the next phase may hold.

And this suggests a few things for how to manage our portfolio:

• Geographic diversification matters more than ever. If the “enemy” is shifting, then capital and regulation will too. Investors should pay attention to which regions are becoming favored or penalized.

• Narratives drive investment flows. Countries seen as aligned with the U.S. may benefit from favorable trade deals, while others could see sanctions or exit of foreign capital. Watch the political tides.

• Cycles bring opportunity and risk. As we near the peak, the temptation is to chase momentum. But historically, these moments often precede a correction. Smart investors begin quietly rotating—not in fear, but with intention.

To me, this isn’t about predicting the next war or chasing the next tech boom. It’s about recognizing that patterns repeat, and in doing so, create predictable distortions. We don’t have to agree with the narrative to see how it’s likely to play out.

Because in every cycle, capital follows the story. And those who notice the story early can position accordingly, before the headlines catch up.