America
Trump’s Fed pick Kevin Warsh signals aggressive rate cuts fueled by AI productivity boom
Kevin Warsh, Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Federal Reserve, has argued that American interest rates should be lower.
According to a report by the Financial Times (FT), Warsh believes that the primary driver for this shift is the artificial intelligence (AI) boom—which he considers “the most productivity-enhancing wave of our lives, past, present, and future.” He contends that this surge provides the Fed with the leeway to lower rates without fueling inflation.
The Fed nominee believes he can give these productivity gains a chance to flourish, much like former Chair Alan Greenspan did in the 1990s.
“Greenspan, based on anecdotal and quite esoteric data, didn’t think we were in a position where we needed to raise rates,” Warsh said during a December interview with Sadi Khan, CEO of Aven Financial. “As a result, we had a stronger economy and more stable prices.”
Warsh’s perspective is shared by other Trump administration officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who likewise favors the rapid and sharp interest rate cuts the president desires.
“It is clear that we are in the early stages of a productivity boom, similar to the 1990s,” Bessent told CNBC earlier this month. He added that observers should read the biography of Greenspan by former Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, which details how the former chair “properly jump-started the economy.”
Greenspan’s pivotal move regarding productivity dates back to September 1996. At that time, Greenspan entered a Fed board meeting and attempted to persuade colleagues to postpone the rate hike that many of them sought.
He informed the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) that productivity was increasing faster than official data suggested.
“Many people weren’t entirely convinced; Greenspan began to explain certain aspects of productivity growth in a way that people really struggled to understand,” Janet Yellen, then-president of the San Francisco Fed, told the FT.
Yellen added that Greenspan was “absolutely right.” Ultimately, nearly every member of the FOMC, including Yellen—who would later become Fed chair—supported Greenspan’s productivity forecast and kept borrowing costs steady, though they pledged to raise them if inflation emerged.
Three decades later, Warsh believes he can repeat the master’s move. Jerome Powell, whom Warsh is set to replace, has also hinted at believing in at least some of the AI hype.
“When you look back, there will be some disruptions that come in waves, but ultimately, technology increases productivity, and that is the basis for rising wages,” Powell stated in January.
On Wednesday evening, Fed Governor Lisa Cook echoed this sentiment, noting, “Growing evidence suggests that AI has the power to significantly increase productivity.”
Vincent Reinhart, a former Fed official who attended FOMC meetings, agrees that there is a “compelling direction” suggesting AI will increase productivity and lower inflation over time.
However, Reinhart—now chief economist at BNY Investments—noted that while the technology “certainly bends the path upward for expected output,” it is currently “contributing very little to productivity.”
Many economists believe the AI boom is currently driving demand rather than expanding the US economy’s supply capacity. They point to the surge in capital investments and stock market gains, which benefit the wealthiest Americans and boost spending.
Warsh predicts that the AI boom will rapidly disrupt the business world, and that the best companies will be doing “unimaginable things” within a year.
As a researcher at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, Warsh has had a front-row seat to the evolution of the AI industry.
His mentor, Stanley Druckenmiller, said that Warsh’s time managing private equity investments—mostly involving tech companies—at the billionaire’s family office has placed him in an ideal position to evaluate the technology’s impact on the economy.
Speaking to the FT about Silicon Valley, Druckenmiller said:
“He has a great network there, and because he possesses not just high-level information but also the details of AI’s speed and disruptive impact, I think he has a better understanding than a normal macroeconomist.”
If the Senate confirms Warsh in a timely manner, the Fed chair nominee will take office in mid-May. He will immediately face pressure to implement significant rate cuts from the current 3.5-3.75% range ahead of the midterm elections in November.
Recent policy forecasts from Fed officials indicate they intend to cut US borrowing costs only once this year, keeping the benchmark rate above 3.25%—well above the 1% level desired by the president.
Those present during the September 1996 vote say Greenspan relied on data, not just anecdotes, to convince the committee.
If Warsh wants to convince today’s rate-setters of an AI-driven productivity boom, he will need to do the same.
“Greenspan’s intuition was supported by deep research, uncovering things other people couldn’t find,” said former Fed Vice Chair Don Kohn, who attended the meeting as FOMC secretary. “He is someone who places great importance on data. This wasn’t just a claim; wages were rising, profits were high, and inflation was low—there was a puzzle to be solved.”
Yellen noted, “Greenspan did a lot of research on his own. Using a vast amount of economic data, he truly tried to prove this thesis.”
America
Milei hardens Falklands stance with oil sanctions and defence push
Argentine President Javier Milei has said he will tighten sanctions on companies involved in oil projects around the Falkland/Malvinas Islands.
Milei also said he would increase defence resources in the south of the country and submit a bill to Congress aimed at strengthening Argentina’s response to what he described as violations of sovereignty.
In a televised address, Milei said he would sign a decree to accelerate sanctions under Argentine law against companies participating in oil and gas extraction activities in the territory, which Argentina considers its own but which remains under British control.
Speaking in an address to the nation early on Friday morning, Milei said the United Kingdom was facing a migration and economic crisis, adding that this meant Argentina would prevail in its claim over the Falkland Islands:
“If we look at the structural crisis in the United Kingdom, it is clear that the country is facing multiple crises on many fronts, including migration, demographics, and a difficult economic situation. It is clear that Argentina’s future is extremely promising and that Argentina will prevail.”
Milei said Argentina would intensify efforts to sanction not only the companies involved, but also their shareholders, executives, and suppliers.
“We will continue to prevent companies that are directly or indirectly involved in projects (on the islands) without Argentina’s permission from operating on Argentine territory,” the Argentine leader said.
He also stated that the government would issue an emergency decree to expand defence resources, under which a naval base would be built in the nearby province of Tierra del Fuego and telecommunications capabilities would be strengthened.
Milei added that he would submit an urgent “national defence of sovereignty” bill to Congress in order to stiffen penalties for unauthorised activities around the islands, extend sanctions to suppliers, and broaden the legal framework to cover other activities affecting Argentina’s natural resources.
Milei noted that Argentina had determined that the Sea Lion offshore project, operated by Navitas Petroleum and Rockhopper Exploration, could begin oil exploration work in the coming months, presenting an imminent threat to Argentine interests.
The remarks mark a harder line from Milei, who had previously called for the Falkland Islands dispute to be resolved through diplomacy even while seeking warmer ties with Britain.
A British overseas territory located roughly 500 km east of the Argentine mainland, the Falkland Islands have long been claimed by Argentina.
Britain has controlled the islands since 1833, and the two countries fought a brief war over them in 1982.
London maintains that residents of the Falkland Islands voted on their political status and right to self-determination in a referendum held in March 2013. An overwhelming majority of 99.8% voted to remain an overseas territory of the United Kingdom.
In his speech, Milei stated that residents of the Falkland Islands do not possess the right to self-determination and called on the country to unite around its claim to the islands.
Arguing that the global wind is currently “blowing in favour of Argentina’s demands”, Milei said: “A short time ago, President [Donald] Trump announced that the US is reconsidering its historic stance on the Malvinas islands.”
The British conservative newspaper The Telegraph wrote that the move would appease the US president, who intervened in the dispute and implied he would not assist the United Kingdom in fighting off an invasion of the Falkland Islands.
Asked whether the US would “come to the aid” of Britain, Trump referred to his confrontation with Iran, saying: “Your country was not there to help me.”
Trump then questioned whether Britain would have the capacity to defend the islands, telling GB News:
“Look, I was there when the first war broke out. That was a very long time ago, and I watched it very closely. You handled yourselves very well. You took the islands back quite decisively, but it is very far away.”
Speculation is mounting that Buenos Aires and Washington are discussing an agreement granting the US access to oil extracted off the Malvinas.
On the eve of Milei’s speech, Argentine Minister of Energy and Mining Daniel Gonzalez Casartelli was in Washington to discuss energy investments with American oil companies and members of the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu’s son Yair clashed with the British right by demanding that the Falkland Islands be placed under Argentine sovereignty.
According to Bloomberg, Argentina is currently in the midst of an oil boom. Drilling activity is accelerating in the Vaca Muerta shale formation in Patagonia, which already produces more than 1 million barrels of oil and gas per day.
The country also has some offshore production operations, and exploration activities have been carried out in South Atlantic waters in recent years.
Meanwhile, Milei met Sarah Rogers, a senior US State Department official, at a conservative political forum held in Chile.
Reiterating Argentina’s claim to the islands, Milei said: “We must take back these islands, which are negligible in national terms. There is no other way forward. This is the best way to pay tribute to those who sacrificed their lives for this cause.”
America
US House passes bill to strip federal aid over Israel boycotts
The US House of Representatives has passed a controversial bill to strip federal financial aid from colleges and universities that participate in boycotts against Israel.
The Republican-led measure targets calls for accountability directed at the Tel Aviv government over its military campaign in the Gaza Strip, as well as expressions of solidarity with Palestine on university campuses.
Entitled the “Protecting Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2026”, the legislation was approved on Thursday in a 237–169 vote.
Only two Republican lawmakers voted against the measure, while 33 Democrats broke party lines to vote in favour. The bill will now proceed to the Senate.
Designated as H.R. 4795, the proposal bars colleges and universities that benefit from federal student aid programmes from engaging in commercial boycotts against Israel.
Institutions receiving Title VI funding for international studies and foreign language programmes are also required to certify that they do not prevent students or faculty from participating in academic programmes in the occupied territories, nor restrict Israeli students and academics from accessing their campuses.
The bill was co-sponsored by Representative Virginia Foxx, a North Carolina Republican, and Representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat.
Representative Tim Walberg, chairman of the House Education Committee, argued that taxpayer money should under no circumstances flow to institutions that “discriminate against Israel”.
Gottheimer, a staunch supporter of the Israeli government, stated that the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement is a campaign “targeting a single country and a single religion”.
Opponents of the bill emphasised that the measure seeks to solve a non-existent problem and constitutes an attack on constitutionally protected free speech.
The ranking Democrat on the committee, Representative Bobby Scott, pointed out that not a single US college or university has actually joined the global BDS movement. Scott recalled that while student and faculty bodies have announced support for BDS, university administrations have refused to implement those demands.
During the floor debate, Scott said: “We must fight antisemitism wherever it appears, but we should not do so by penalising protected free speech or conflating a student’s view with university policy.”
Representative Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat who opposes the BDS movement, also voted against the bill. Nadler noted that the only way to protect opinions one agrees with is to defend the right to express opinions one does not agree with.
The liberal Jewish organisation J Street was also among the actors opposing the bill. The group warned that the measure conflates boycotts of the Israeli government with those directed at companies linked to illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.
J Street stated that the bill places Israel in an exceptional position, does nothing to protect Jewish students, and risks inflaming antisemitism rather than countering it. By contrast, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) openly backed the legislation.
The vote follows nearly three years of sustained protests by students and faculty against Israel’s war in Gaza.
According to data from the Ministry of Health in Gaza, attacks carried out following the 7 October 2023 operation and the subsequent military campaign launched by Israel have killed more than 73,000 Palestinians, while flattening the vast majority of the region’s universities, schools, and civilian infrastructure.
Encampments erected on university campuses demanded an end to the carnage and called on universities to divest financial holdings from companies profiting from the occupation and the war.
The Washington administration and its allies frequently characterised these protests as antisemitic. The Trump administration, meanwhile, targeted universities with various investigations and threats to freeze federal funds.
Aiming to protect their congressional majority in the November midterm elections and during the final two years of Trump’s term, House Republicans are keeping the issue on the agenda to deepen divisions among Democrats, who have grown increasingly critical of Israel as mass casualties in Gaza mount.
In July, amid accusations that the campaign in Gaza had reached genocidal proportions, more than 100 House Democrats supported an initiative to cut certain military aid to Israel, a US ally.
Critics argue that the latest bill is an extension of anti-BDS legislation previously enacted across more than 30 US states, which compels public contractors and public institutions to pledge not to boycott Israel.
Free speech advocates have long maintained that these state laws conflict with the First Amendment of the Constitution.
The measure passed by the House of Representatives aims to expand this pressure to the entire federal student financial aid system.
Although no US university has formally adopted a BDS decision, the bill makes even limited commercial or academic distancing from the Israeli government—including entities operating in the occupied Palestinian territories—grounds for terminating federal funding.
America
Pentagon office takes 35% stake in Venezuela oil venture
The Trump administration’s oil agreement with Venezuela represents the riskiest venture to date for a Pentagon unit originally established for an entirely different purpose.
The White House announced this week that the Office of Strategic Capital (OSC), an entity operating under the Department of Defence, will acquire a 35% stake “at no cost to American taxpayers” in North American Blue Energy Partners, a firm headed by politically connected Venezuelan investor Alejandro Betancourt.
The objective is to make Venezuelan oilfields more attractive to US investors, thereby increasing revenue for Caracas whilst simultaneously squeezing out Chinese and Russian firms.
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the OSC has already facilitated equity acquisitions in at least five other companies during President Donald Trump’s second term. The OSC was created to provide loans for the development of critical technologies.
However, because the Venezuelan agreement involves petroleum rather than conventional critical technology, it stretches the agency’s statutory boundaries even further and has already prompted Democrats to pledge congressional investigations.
Should Democrats regain power in Washington this November, any oversight drive could place the office’s efforts to secure state equity positions in private corporations under intense scrutiny.
In an interview with Semafor, a former OSC official stated:
“Acquiring equity was never intended when the OSC was founded; that circumstance alone does not necessarily constitute a problem. Nevertheless, it raises some legitimate legal and ethical questions.”
Jon Hillman, who directs the council’s tracking system, noted in an interview that the Venezuelan oil deal “appears to be uncharted territory”, adding that the office’s “mission is to catalyze private investment into specific, critical supply chain technologies necessary for national security.”
The statute that established the OSC defines its authority to provide “capital support” as extending and guaranteeing loans and offering technical assistance.
A Pentagon spokesperson initially told Reuters that the office was “not acquiring equity” in private enterprises due to this constrained remit.
On Tuesday, however, a US official offered a contrasting account to journalists, stating that the authority to acquire a stake in Betancourt’s company via “penny warrants” was “granted to the OSC when it was enacted into law under the Biden administration.”
A “penny warrant” is a financial contract that confers upon its holder the right to purchase corporate shares at a negligible, nominal price.
The US official added:
“This is an entirely standard arrangement in terms of the OSC’s capacity to maintain the financial position it holds under this agreement, and all financial positions granted to the OSC comply fully with the law.”
Peter Harrell, a visiting scholar at Georgetown University Law Center, said in an interview that it was “impossible to render a definitive legal opinion” because officials had “not advanced a precise legal theory.”
Harrell added that the Trump administration may be banking on no party possessing either the legal standing or the inclination to bring a lawsuit over the transaction.
That calculation encompasses oil corporations hoping to profit from the newly reopened Venezuelan petroleum sector.
Cari Stinebower, an attorney at the law firm Steptoe who advises petroleum firms seeking to conduct business in Venezuela, said: “I suspect everyone may be quietly perplexed. Yet I do not believe anyone will speak out, because virtually everyone wants to participate in the investment opportunities in Venezuela.”
Jack Reed, the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, is among those already demanding further particulars regarding the agency’s statutory authority to conclude the agreement.
Certain Republicans are likewise keen to obtain additional information concerning the Venezuelan deal.
The Biden administration formed the OSC in 2022 to provide loans to businesses developing technologies deemed “vital” to national security.
Recent legislative initiatives aimed at formally expanding its authority to encompass equity investments have so far foundered.
Yet under the direction of Deputy Secretary of Defence Steve Feinberg, the administration pressed forward regardless, enlisting bankers to help deploy a lending authority that surged from $1 billion to $200 billion courtesy of recent party-line Republican tax legislation.
The current director of the OSC, David Lorch, previously served as a managing director at Cerberus Capital Management, the private equity firm founded by Feinberg.
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoUS strikes fail to break Iran as regional anchors rise, Dr. Moeini says
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoBlackwater founder Erik Prince creates air defence venture with Kyiv
-
Europe2 weeks agoUK and Russia edge closer to conflict over long-range drone supply
-
Europe2 weeks agoEurope builds drone defence walls along eastern flank against UAVs
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoSouth Korea begins first commercial voyage via Northern Sea Route
-
Opinion2 weeks agoWhat did the Israeli attack in Syria reveal?
-
Asia2 weeks agoChina and Arab states launch 5-year anti-desertification plan
-
America1 week agoPentagon to fully purge Anthropic AI from systems by end of September
