The Gold Move Is A Vote Of No Confidence In The Entire Global Financial Architecture

By Michael Every of Rabobank

As Axios puts it, ‘Wall Street’s playbook for 2026 already needs to be rewritten’. Many players’ do.

Gold is through $5,000 and silver up 5.5% at over $109 – it was even higher intraday. You might not trade either, and I remain sceptical that we are moving back to a gold or silver standard, even for limited international trade. Yet besides the notable industrial implications from silver (and copper), this is hoarding, and a vote of no confidence in the entire global financial architecture. Wall Street is calling it “the Debasement Trade.’ That fails to see that, in time, it can lead to Wall Street being put in a basement, or up against a wall. Plenty to think about there.

The IMF head warned the world to ‘prepare for a global run on the US dollar’, adding the EU should issue more common debt to provide investors with an alternative safe asset to gold and US Treasuries. There are vast structural changes implied in every part of that sentence.

In Japan, 10-year yields are +4.5bps, reversing the recent JGB rally. As the WSJ notes, ‘Wall Street Is Fixated on a Possible Yen Intervention.’ After all, Japanese CPI is 2.1%, 30-year yields are 3.66%, the BOJ can’t do too much because public debt is so high, the country has run five annual trade deficits in a row, removing its protective shield, and a weak JPY isn’t helping, just feeding inflation. Some see Japan needing a US bailout before these JGB problems flow back to US Treasuries… even as markets are wondering who is going to bail the US out.

There, note that, the US is breaking the global architecture to bail itself out. That starts with geopolitics and geoeconomics, then flows back to markets:

PM Takaichi just underlined her country’s alliance with the US would ‘collapse’ if Japan fled a Taiwan crisis. As a result, the US-Japan trade deal –which isn’t an FTA because time is too short for technocratic politesse– is logically likely to hold; Japan’s industry will be worked into US military supply chains; and the US could logically extend its still-powerful fiat largesse to Tokyo. What other options do Japan or the US have? “Because markets”?

Yet South Korea has seen Trump threaten to increase US tariffs back to 25% because Seoul is “not living up to” the trade deal struck last year. As another stick there, the latest US National Defence Strategy makes clear South Korea, as others, is expected to do far more for its own defense under the US umbrella: but the implication could be that umbrellas can be closed if those under them don’t contribute to holding tightly against strong geopolitical winds.

On which, China’s Xi just purged most of his senior generals on a scale unseen since Mao: the WSJ states one was accused of selling nuclear secrets to the US. It certainly appears all power over the PLA is now in Xi’s hands; but all else is far less certain.

In Europe, the EU parliament delayed its decision to unfreeze the EU-US trade deal after the Greenland crisis, while an FTA with India is on the cards. However, NATO chief Rutte warned Europe can’t defend itself without the US, and “The EU should stop dreaming of creating a European pillar for NATO and continue to build ties with the US despite Trump.” The New York Times adds, ‘As Europe’s reliance on natural gas grows, so does Trump’s leverage’, noting concern that “Trump could turn the strong position that the US has gained in the oil and gas industry into a weapon to try to coerce other countries…” So, what is the ultimate EU decision to be?

UK PM Starmer stated the UK doesn’t have to choose between the US and China and is heading to Beijing to strike deals. Note that as with Canadian PM Carney, such trips are planned well in advance. Indeed, Politico claims behind closed doors, ministers have pushed for closer economic collaboration with Beijing for a year, even as they signed a US deal that runs the other way – and as it’s reported that China hacked the Downing Street phones for years. Will the US express the same unhappiness to the UK here as it did to PM Carney, and to PM Starmer over his proposed Chagos Islands deal. If so, does he have to choose?

Carney’s retort that he has no intention of signing an FTA with China (which allows the US to dissolve the USMCA), leaves one wondering what exactly a “strategic partnership” with Beijing, as part of a “New World Order”, involves: the political or military sphere? Meanwhile, in the geoeconomic one, again as predicted, the Canadian press notes the US has broached the idea of “something approaching a North American customs union… The partners would apply a common trade policy to other countries, even globally.” And the US would set it. That would, as its press also notes, render Canada’s status akin to that of Hong Kong within China. Meanwhile, Canada, like the EU, is looking to India for more trade – but that ‘Hong Kong’ issue is in the background.

Not as extreme a case, but still notable, Australia’s financial press underlines that it can expect to be next to be told to make a choice and to spend at least 3.5% of GDP on defence.

Meanwhile, as middle powers talk about propping up the liberal world order without the US, the USS Lincoln Carrier Strike Group has arrived in Middle East, showing what real power is. On one hand, Trump says ‘Iran wants to make a deal,’ yet we may see US strikes against regime targets to trigger new mass protests, and there are suggestions it may impose a Venezuela-style blockade on Iranian oil exports – the kind of upstream disruption of commodity supply chains to China we flagged last year as a trump card vs. Beijing’s control of rare earths (where Japan-China tensions are driving high-tech mineral prices to record highs). Markets will be watching closely.

In the broader region, the Houthis said they may close the Red Sea and Suez Canal again if the US strikes Iran; Hezbollah also said, “we are not neutral,” but it remains to be seen if it is still lethal or not. More broadly, key players are realigning on the expectation that in near future Iran will be less of a threat and the US will be less involved: we see an emerging Saudi-Qatar-Egypt-Turkey-Somalia-Sudan-Yemen-Pakistan alignment vs. the UAE-Israel-Somaliland-South Sudan-South Yemen-India. How will the liberal middle powers tread those waters?

Against this backdrop, it’s reported that a ‘Record number of people in UK live in ‘very deep poverty’, analysis shows’; ‘Health Insurance Is Now More Expensive Than the Mortgage for These Americans’; and ‘Carney unveils hike to GST credit, other measures targeting affordability.’ Moreover, ‘The Wait List for a Birkin or Rolex Is Getting Shorter’ says the WSJ, while “Falling resale values show that even makers of the world’s most popular luxury goods are feeling a slowdown.” Oh, the humanity!

In short, expect domestic politics to stay as ‘interesting’ as geopolitics – and the two are inextricably linked. Indeed, even as Trump appears to be taking a more conciliatory stance over ICE in Minnesota for now, hedge fund star Ray Dalio warns of ‘a more clear civil war.’ Is a Birkin or a Rolex much help in one of those? I’m asking for a friend.

Lastly, as markets wait for the Fed this week while wondering about political pressure on the central bank, Indonesian President Prabowo’s nephew is now a step closer to securing a position as Bank Indonesia’s Deputy Governor. Yes, playbooks are being rewritten – with some very old plays.