Trump’s ultimatum to Iran via social media should be regarded not as a diplomatic statement but as a move that touches the nerve endings of markets. Because the question on everyone’s mind is the same: What happens if this escalates into a hot conflict again?

When trying to understand leadership debates in the United States, looking at the issue solely through individuals or solely through the system can be misleading. In theory, it is often said that “the US system functions independently of individuals,” but in practice, recent years have clearly shown that this is not entirely the case.

When we look at the Middle East, it is impossible to understand the present without acknowledging the past. Since 1948, the conflicts shaped around Israel’s security policies – from the Arab–Israeli wars to interventions in Lebanon, from the Palestinian issue to the current devastation in Gaza – have formed a continuous line of tension.

Last week, we witnessed lively – at times shallow – debates about whether Istanbul and Turkey’s major cities could attract the capital fleeing Middle East due to the war. Many commentators missed the nuance when they responded, “Is there democracy in the UAE?” to those insisting that the rule of law is a precondition for a financial centre.

When diplomacy emerges in the middle of a war in the Middle East, it rarely signals peace – it signals that the cost of conflict has reached a point where calculation begins to replace escalation.

If US troops were to be deployed on the ground in Iran, we would have to shift our analytical framework entirely. At that point, the issue would no longer be about a few missile strikes, a handful of air sorties, or short-lived political signalling.

There are economic clichés that, through repetition, become unquestioned axioms. One of them is: “When there is war, gold goes up.” In the 1980s, during the Iran–Iraq war, that axiom worked flawlessly – gold surged because the financial world was simpler: inflation was high, the dollar was weak, central bank credibility was contested, and investors considered almost nothing else a safe haven.

No matter how powerful an operation is militarily, if the strategic calculus behind it is lacking, the outcomes can be far more complex than expected. Many strategists and security experts argue that precisely this happened in the war launched by Trump and Netanyahu against Iran.

The economic effects of an Iran-centred war in the Middle East cannot be understood only through oil prices. Tourism, aviation, real estate, and the broader service economy are the sectors that react fastest to geopolitical shocks.

The conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran has rapidly moved beyond the category of a “regional tension.” It has evolved into a shock that strikes at the very core of the global economy.

The killing of a cartel leader in Mexico may appear, at first glance, as a clear security victory. The state eliminates a long-wanted figure, and public sentiment briefly leans towards a sense of restored order.

The World Bank’s report published on February 12, titled “Building Human Capital Where It Matters: Homes, Neighborhoods and Workplaces” and spanning approximately 140 pages, is not merely a technical development document; it serves as a serious warning for developing countries.

When analyses by several publications examining Kevin Warsh’s interest-rate rhetoric over the past twenty years are read together with the comprehensive interviews he has given in recent days, the issue stated in the title takes on a much broader framework: the global struggle of central banks for independence and legitimacy.

There was a time when we were shouting, “Let’s Get Physical.” In the 1980s, losing weight meant gyms, aerobics tapes, sweat, patience, and a shared sense of enthusiasm. You put on a Jane Fonda cassette, pulled on your tights, and people lost weight while socialising. Today, however, weight loss has largely turned into an injection, a subscription, and a budget line item.

Foreign friends reading these lines may already know this: Turkey was once a place where you could enjoy a reasonable quality of life at a rational cost. Over the last 2.5–3 years, however, it has turned into one of the most expensive countries in Europe.