License to Intervene
License to Intervene
I’m in Davos. I was last here in 1999 — a period in history marked by (relative) peace, a narrower wealth gap, and techno optimism. Today geopolitics resembles a cross between pre-World War II and the Gilded Age, and Big Tech is the foe. But the most striking change is that the U.S. is no longer the good guy. It’s as if MGM greenlit a body swap installment of the Bond franchise, where 007 and Ernst Stavro Blofeld switch places. Think: Diamonds Are Forever meets Freaky Friday.
American military interventions have always reminded me of the Bond films. The opening act is nothing short of spectacular: a daring production marked by operational excellence, jaw-dropping personal courage, and high-tech lethality. But too often the rest of the movie serves up mediocrity and confusion, resulting in citizens/viewers asking, “How did we get here?”
Goldfinger — the Gulf War (1990-91)
In response to Iraq invading Kuwait, George H.W. Bush assembled a 42-nation coalition. After a six-month build up, it took 43 days and fewer than 300 U.S. killed for the American-led forces to expel Iraq from Kuwait. Bush decided to declare victory and leave, vs. attempting to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein’s regime. The first Gulf War was Goldfinger: There was an iconic villain (Saddam), clear stakes (oil and sovereignty), spectacular set pieces (smart bombs down ventilation shafts), public support (yellow ribbons), and a clear ending. Even the dialogue was Oscar-worthy: “This aggression will not stand.” The plot was a perfect execution of the Powell Doctrine.
Spectre — the Iraq War (2003-11)
It took just 26 days of major combat operations for U.S.-led forces to enter Iraq, destroy Saddam Hussein’s military, and capture Baghdad. The “shock and awe” of Tomahawk missiles decimating their targets, American armored units on “thunder runs” slicing through the opposition, and the toppling of Saddam’s statue were as compelling as the opening of Spectre. Unfortunately, the next eight years also resembled Spectre. Weapons of mass destruction that didn’t exist. George W. Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” photo-op. Abu Ghraib. There was no plan to stand up Iraqi civil society; we just imposed a democracy — a contradiction in terms. Sectarian violence followed, at an enormous human cost: 4,500 American dead, 32,000 wounded, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties. We squandered trillions of dollars — money we should’ve invested in America. Political division at home. ISIS. Iranian hegemony.
Critics panned Spectre for wasting one of the best openings in Bond history and for desperately attempting to retroactively connect the Daniel Craig films into one grand conspiracy. (See: the nonexistent link between Saddam and 9/11, fictional WMDs, and a Neocon pipedream about spreading democracy throughout the Middle East.) W. would be one of the most liked ex-presidents — his Pepfar program was credited with saving millions of lives in Africa before Trump came for it — had he not produced an Oscar-caliber geopolitical disaster film.
The World Is Not Enough — Venezuela
The U.S. military raid to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was a serious flex. For months, a surveillance team observed Maduro’s every move, while special forces trained in an exact, full-size replica of Maduro’s Caracas safe house. The night of the raid, hundreds of U.S. warplanes knocked out Venezuelan defenses. In a little over two hours, American forces eliminated more than 50 Venezuelan and Cuban soldiers and captured Maduro and his wife, while sustaining zero dead and seven wounded. The ultimate Bond opener.
A month after the raid, however, America’s intervention in Venezuela is beginning to resemble The World Is Not Enough — a forgettable Bond film with a convoluted plot about controlling oil pipelines in the Caucasus. Trump’s casus belli (fentanyl and cocaine) didn’t survive the press conference; he mentioned illegal drugs just five times, while talking about oil 27 times. However, Venezuela’s black gold is heavy crude; it costs $70 to extract a barrel of oil you can sell for $58. Regime change for oil, 007? That’s like invading the Alps for snow. Cut to: An Oval Office meeting where ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods told Trump Venezuela is “uninvestable.”
Where The World Is Not Enough had a bad script, Trump’s “Donroe Doctrine” doesn’t have a script at all. After the raid, Trump announced that Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, was in charge, saying she would “make Venezuela great again.” But Rodriguez struck a defiant tone, saying, “There is only one president in Venezuela, and his name is Nicolás Maduro.” In a column for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, retired U.S. Marine Colonel Mark F. Cancian called the Maduro raid a “military victory with no viable endgame,” likening it to conquering Nazi Germany but keeping the Nazis in charge.
Quantum of Solace — Greenland
Quantum of Solace is the Bond film nobody asked for. The geopolitical equivalent? Seizing Greenland. In the film, the villain’s scheme revolves around controlling Bolivia’s water supply — a resource he could simply purchase. Trump’s motives are even more convoluted. Greenland has valuable minerals, but 80% of the land is covered in ice, making extraction difficult and costly. One Arctic expert called the idea “completely bonkers,” adding, “You might as well mine on the moon.” Greenland is strategically important, especially as the melting Arctic ice cap opens up new shipping lanes, but we don’t need to invade — we already have the right to reinforce existing bases under a 1951 treaty. Speaking of treaties, attacking Denmark would blow up NATO, the most successful military alliance in history. We walked into a Starbucks with an AR-15, locked and loaded, and demanded a grande latte for $6.46. OK, we can have that without the gun or the threats. So fucking stupid.
What’s the motivation here? Some theories. First, Greenland is 3x the size of Texas. Seizing Greenland, or bribing Greenlanders to break their ties with Denmark and join the U.S., would be a real estate deal on the order of the Louisiana Purchase, albeit with a fraction of the ROI. Second, Trump said he feels that ownership of Greenland is “psychologically needed for success.” Third, like a movie star snubbed by the Academy, Trump is mad he didn’t win the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump’s Greenland folly is Quantum of Solace as written by the writer’s room from Veep, directed by Ed Wood (ask Gemini), and produced by the team that brought you Ishtar. Note: During his speech at Davos Trump backed away from an invasion (#yay).
In geopolitical terms, the audience for Quantum of Stupid was Russia and China. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the NATO concept had “discredited itself.” That’s Russian for “stupid,” i.e., the U.S. is hurting Europe while hurting itself, and we love to see it. Without NATO, Putin could take advantage by rolling up Ukraine and then turning his attention toward seizing the Baltics, Finland, and Poland. A wider European war would likely follow. Meanwhile, China will continue to expand its influence. Last week, during an official visit, Chinese leader Xi Jinping urged Canadian leader Mark Carney to chart a path of “strategic autonomy” independent of the U.S. In a speech at Davos, Carney gave an obituary for the rules-based order America once led, saying, “the middle powers must act together, because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.” For China, the entree is Taiwan.
In economic terms, Quantum of Stupid is already a flop. After announcing a 10% tariff on goods from eight European nations that immediately rallied around Denmark, the U.S. got a sneak preview of coming attractions. Denmark’s largest pension fund announced plans to sell off $100 million in Treasuries (it denied the move was political). Pimco’s chief investment officer told the Financial Times it was pivoting away from U.S. assets because of Trump’s “unpredictable” policies. Europe holds 40% of foreign U.S. Treasuries. As Ray Dalio said, “You could easily imagine it could simply become unpopular to buy or hold U.S. debt.” True. You could also imagine the EU weaponizing capital. “For all its military and economic strength, the U.S. has one key weakness: It relies on others to pay its bills via large external deficits,” said Deutsche Bank’s George Saravelos, adding that it’s “not clear why Europeans would be as willing to play this part.”
You Only Live Twice — Iran
In You Only Live Twice, Bond fakes his death to infiltrate SPECTRE and stop World War III. The title refers to a Japanese proverb: “You only live twice: once when you are born, and once when you look death in the face.” The Islamic Republic is looking death in the face, and the U.S. has a small window to pull the plug. This should be the Bond film every American wants. The Islamic Republic caused 17% of all U.S. casualties in Iraq and armed anti-American forces in Afghanistan. It remains the world’s chief sponsor of terror, committed to a policy of “death to America.” Iran’s mullahs have a brutal human rights record, especially when it comes to women and LGBTQ people. However, the left is silent, suffering under a moral color code. When the oppressor is brown, it experiences moral paralysis.
We squandered regime change opportunities during the 2009 protests over rigged elections and again in 2022 when Iranian women took to the streets. (Call this a regrettable prequel, Live and Let Live.) Now the regime is even more vulnerable. Since October 7, 2023, Israel has systematically dismantled Iranian proxy forces. Meanwhile, Iran is facing economic collapse — the rial fell by 45% against the dollar in 2025, inflation accelerated from 33% in 2024 to 42% last year, food prices have increased by 70% YoY, and an estimated one-third of Iranians live in poverty. Protests have galvanized society. The resulting crackdown has killed as many as 20,000 Iranians, according to a UN estimate. Airstrikes could defang the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, sabotage could disrupt infrastructure, cyber could cripple regime intelligence and propaganda capabilities while boosting opposition visibility, and special forces could take out the mullahs. The question isn’t whether we’re capable of regime change, but what comes next? The answer is likely something better, or less bad. Military intervention is always a risk, and this is one worth taking.
Unserious
The tragedy of American power isn’t that it’s declining; it’s that it’s increasingly unserious. We still have the muscle, the money, and the moral case. What we lack is patience, humility, and the stamina for the boring part — asking “What happens next?” Until we relearn how to write second acts, every intervention will look the same: dazzling, destructive, and destined for a sequel no one asked for.
Life is so rich,
P.S. At Davos this week, I sat down with historian Niall Ferguson to discuss geopolitics. Listen on Apple or Spotify, or watch our conversation on YouTube.
31 Comments
Need more Scott in your life?
The Prof G Markets Pod now has a newsletter edition. Sign up here to receive it every Monday. What a thrill.
So painfully salient, while displaying the art of storytelling to drive home your point. The remarkable stupidity of Trump destroying the world order that we disproportionately benefited by is so heartbreaking. Who are the 30+% who enthusiastically approve of this past year? How can anyone still be independent or undecided?
The USA transitioning Greenland into an unincorporated territory is strategic brilliance and a win-win for all. Trump is being advised by the best. Greenland is the Amazon/Costco superstore of geopolitical strategy to have in your armoury with a huge land mass, natural resources, abundant water, a perfect place for quantum computing due to the subzero temperatures required, small population, ready to grow. Even more importantly, it’s very position puts a huge bollard in place between the US and Russia/China. And, a bonus for the US: the monitoring of anti-satellite missiles from the ground using radar systems and satellite tracking technologies to detect and track missile launches and their trajectories – will be far (easier) from this location.
40 days and nights of bombing Iraq preceded the 2003 invasion. How does that not count or always get overlooked by Americans? Also tons of US personnel topped themselves and some physically abused their partners. Engage in pointless wars and this is what you get, collateral damage. The real victims are the Iraqi civilians suffering from invasion and the preceding decade of sanctions. Your shining city on a hill certainly looks tarnished.
Scott, your sentiments about Iran are completely on target but your solution for removing that terrible regime is, unfortunately, not. Force is not what will undermine a terrorist regime that honors sacrifice and considers death martyrdom. The support structure of the regime needs to be undermined, bit by bit. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard is made of individuals, the top layer of whom need to be pried away from their support of the regime, using various inducements. Even the top mullahs of the regime are sending their money, property and families abroad, and they can be persuaded to go with them. Listen to the podcast by Haviv Rettig on the subject.
Iran is there for the changing, but where are the real estate opportunities? With almost 90milliin and a youngish population, change is possible, but not without external help.
If only there was an international body to enact a united intervention.
Great writing and you should visit Davos more frequently
Another bunch of angry bollocks from an angry man
Takeaways from this article:
USA/Space Force has the ability to shut down / turn off systems.
USMIL has operational advanced sonic weapons.
20 US soldiers just liquidated 250-300 enemy soldiers without suffering a single casualty
Serious flex indeed.
According to an eyewitness account, the US military used weaponry and technology unlike anything he had ever seen.
“We were on guard, but suddenly all our radar systems shut down without any explanation. The next thing we saw were drones, a lot of drones, flying over our positions. We didn’t know how to react,” the security guard recounted.
After those drones appeared, some helicopters arrived, but there were very few. I think barely eight helicopters. From those helicopters, soldiers came down, but a very small number. Maybe twenty men. But those men were technologically very advanced. They didn’t look like anything we’ve fought against before.
“And then the battle began?” the interviewer asked.
“Yes, but it was a massacre. We were hundreds, but we had no chance. They were shooting with such precision and speed. It seemed like each soldier was firing 300 rounds per minute. We couldn’t do anything,” the witness said.
“And your own weapons? Didn’t they help?” the interviewer asked.
“No help at all. Because it wasn’t just the weapons. At one point, they launched something—I don’t know how to describe it. It was like a very intense sound wave. Suddenly I felt like my head was exploding from the inside. We all started bleeding from the nose. Some were vomiting blood. We fell to the ground, unable to move,” he said.
“Those twenty men, without a single casualty, killed hundreds of us. We had no way to compete with their technology, with their weapons. I swear, I’ve never seen anything like it. We couldn’t even stand up after that sonic weapon or whatever it was,” the eyewitness said.
Great piece, using the Bond analogies. The Powell Doctrine, if applied to Iran, suggests the right course of action. But does it rely on a rational, sane Commander in Chief?
1.Vital Interests: Maybe, maybe not; but certainly it helps Israel.
2.Clear Objectives: None that we’ve heard of save one: regime change. Is the next regime better than the last one, or this?
3.Risk Analysis: We don’t know what Hegseth, Rubio, or the Generals and Intelligence community know, but we are dealing with a risk taker in Trump, who may not care.
4.Exhaustion of Other Means: Not clear here, certainly economic sanctions suggest yes, and the bombing attack perhaps no.
5. Exit Strategy: Nope, ‘you break it you own it’ sorta kinda still applies.
6. Full Consideration of Consequences: The big mystery. Might this be a starter of WWIII?
7. Public Support: NO, the people who fought the last round of losing wars elected Trump in part to end useless interventions abroad.
8. International Support: The international crowd has been so confused, angered, and humiliated there is little likelihood they’d support this war.
Israel is the enemy, not Iran. Israel is a death cult society…just the thing, in the thrall of its fundamentalist culture (any nation guided by the word of a god is dangerous.) and ready to resort to nuclear weapons without a thought. Like the Muslims and Christian Zionists, they welcome death as a road to the hereafter, which would be OK if they didn’t want to drag everybody down with them.
Very nice analysis, creative and fun (like an entertaining death)
Niall Ferguson is a typical British fascist and a Know=nothing who is proud of it.
I am not sure you can “lack humility and patience” and have “a moral case” at the same time, Scott. This sounds suspiciously like riding two horses with one butt.
Trump is a grifter, in essence, and now selling some kind of political vaporware. So, he has to make lots of noise to distract. The scams have gotten bigger and bolder since 2017-2018. And the distracting noise has become louder. Like a drug, small doses no longer work on the addict. As for the scam, its global and he is no longer hiding it.
As for the “Peace Board…” I saw Kushner’s presentation… It’s a pig-butchering scam of sorts. That’s why that semi-demented old con man talks of love all the time, I guess.
You heard it from me,
Best wishes from Switzerland…
“Greenland; What’s the motivation here?” Very good question, which brings on a what if?
Now take a careful look at the NASA web pages about sea level rise, and you will find a short video, (indeed look hard enough throughout the NASA web pages . . . several short videos), showing just how much land, (and particularly US sea level cities), that the US will lose from such an 6m sea level rise. So the first thing to realise is; someone in NASA believes in the potential for that to occur in very short order; or why so speculate?
It has been my personal opinion since 2012 upon finding a number of climate scientists debating that very scenario due to a flood of melt water caused havoc, including a major bridge washed away. Greenland enjoys an ice sheet up to 3Kms thick. Now substitute that as a water column behind a dam also 3Kms high, and work it out for yourself. The pressure back down at surface level, and compare your weight placed upon an ice skate that melts the surface so that you can always skim along in an ice dance? Now add what we have all seen, wonderful video’s of lovely blue melt water falling from that 3Km’s high surface down a Moulin, and work out the kinetic energy delivered back down to the rock surface, which must be reducing the base surface area of the ice. At what point does the surface reduce sufficiently to allow the base of the ice to melt like under the ice skate?
It is my opinion that NASA, and thus Trump sees the potential for a sudden collapse, simply caused by the dynamics of a 3Kms thick ice sheet now on the move; nothing will stop it once it starts. That will; surely; rapidly create a massive area of new land; land which every nation will need to cover the displacement of their sea level populations.
That is surely why Trump wants total control over Greenland.
Great structure and entertaining read. Re: Iran, of course, you are wrong. Two life rules for nations: Don’t attack or invade other countries unless you’ve been attacked. Don’t try regime change unless you are invading someone (and so therefore have been attacked). Wish all countries would adhere to those life rules. With Venezuela, Greenland and the funding of genocide, the USA has reinforced its reputation as the worst country in the world, the only one that fucks over other countries anywhere in the world.
The US will use Greenland for Missile and submarine defense. Climate change is creating new potential trade routes in the arctic region. Climate change is making Fossil fuel and Rare Earth resources more exploitable. Our adversaries are becoming more active in this region of the globe.
Since I am old enough to have enjoyed many a Bond film when it first came out, I found this piece provocative and entertaining. I liked a number of the metaphors and may have to (with or without permission) borrow ‘imposing democracy’ and ‘color-coded morality’.
Thanks. Now, what’s to be done?
An entire article about James Bond and the U.S. military raid to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and not a single mention of the sonic weapons the US used?
The Trump administration (mafia) is so incompetent and corrupt that they can’t even govern domestically. Trump and his clowns are just better off not intervening anywhere abroad because the odds are highly likely it will blow up into chaos. They are just not deep thinkers strategically or otherwise. Given this situation the US should not be intervening anywhere. It makes no sense and there is little public support for this thinking.
THE LEFT…
“The Islamic Republic caused 17% of all U.S. casualties in Iraq and armed anti-American forces in Afghanistan. It remains the world’s chief sponsor of terror, committed to a policy of “death to America.” Iran’s mullahs have a brutal human rights record, especially when it comes to women and LGBTQ people. However, the left is silent, suffering under a moral color code. When the oppressor is brown, it experiences moral paralysis.”
Antisemitism: It’s only bad when Israel or the Jews do it. And the Jews usually do it in self defense of their civilians.
Thank you for this.
Good stuff as usual, although when was this iconic Goldfinger line “This aggression will not stand”? It was a standout in The Big Lebowski, specifically referencing Bush’s line with Jeff Bridges. The comparison didn’t make much sense as there was no public support in Goldfinger, but ah well, makes for your larger post I suppose.
I too would like to see the Iranian mullahs exit the stage. But I wonder how the Shia militias in Iraq would react to seeing the “holy men” killed/captured by U.S. special forces.
You are right on every point. For two decades I have thought we should seize on any Iranian threat and wipe out the regime including if necessary nukes. I’ve been in Iran three times with my Iranian wife. We don’t discuss Iran. Is there a way to get rid of Trump? There must be individuals around him who would give their lives to take him out of the good of this country.
I love it when you know better than anyone else how to conduct foreign policy. You must be in Davos with all those other folks who know best for us peons. Yeah “special forces could take out the mullahs.”. Yeah ! Let’s start a world war 3 religious jihad war!! Kill those pesky mullahs!! What could go wrong ! Clever you are not
Power isn’t the problem. Follow through is.
Thanks. Fun piece on not so fun facts. Looking forward to ‘From Russia with love’s’ plot twist…
Some great writing here. Goes hand in hand with your work on podcasts (and with Kara). You had me—all the way up to bum-fucking Iran. Our record there and in the Middle East in general would militate against anything so precipitous. Russia and China should be restrained from regime-changing but not us? Let Baron Trump and his ilk lead the charge then…
“We still have the muscle, the money, and the moral case”.
Seriously? we have the moral case? Where is that?
Love the rest though.
JUST.BRILLIANT! And Good Fun!
My view: we need to stop messing around in other countries politics.