The game of Risk is that classic strategic board game from the 1980s that ate up hours of my childhood as my cousins and I waged fictional campaigns for world domination. My kids have zero interest in deep strategy games, so the board hasn’t come out in decades. But recent events keep pulling me back to it—only now the board is the real-world stage.
What makes Risk so addictive is the mix: strategic planning, diplomacy, conflict, conquest, and yes, luck. Sometimes luck hands you a golden opportunity right in the middle of your grand plan.
As I’ve mentioned in past posts, the Trump administration has been clear about securing the Western Hemisphere and reducing reliance on Asian supply chains as the world splits into three economic blocs: Fortress America, the European Union, and China/Asia. In January, Trump green-lit a bold move: capturing Venezuelan President Maduro. It went incredibly smoothly and pulled South America closer to the U.S. orbit. Consider what happened:
- Maduro was removed from power in America’s backyard, replaced by a regime far more friendly to the U.S. (yes, by someone who will cooperate for their own survival).
- The U.S. now effectively controls Venezuela’s heavy crude oil output.
- The Venezuelan military offered almost no resistance, so very little munitions were expended.
- No sustained U.S. ground presence was needed—no American lives lost.
- And perhaps most importantly, it boosted confidence across the administration and military.
In Risk, luck is dice rolls going your way. In the real world, as Seneca put it, “Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.” The combination here—no munitions wasted, no casualties, soaring confidence—created a narrow window of opportunity to the administration. In recent weeks, we’ve seen military assets shift from the Caribbean to the Middle East amid ongoing talks with Iran. This past weekend, the U.S. and Israel launched massive airstrikes on the Iranian regime.
In my view, this isn’t another limited strike followed by a quick cease-fire. It’s the start of a sustained bombing campaign aimed at eliminating Iran’s military hardware (not mass personnel casualties—a soldier without bullets or drones isn’t much threat). Rumors circulated that Trump was briefed: killing Khamenei would just bring another hardliner. Unlike Venezuela, a decapitation strike wasn’t the path, so a different strategy makes sense. This administration seems emboldened by every win (and even setbacks), and regime change feels like the endgame. It would unfold in phases: (1) degrade Iran’s conventional military assets, (2) open unimpeded access for strikes on nuclear sites, and (3) force new leadership to play ball or face collapse.
To be clear, Iran’s ballistic missile and drone stockpiles are depleted after years of clashes. Analysts estimate they could sustain high-intensity barrages for only 1-2 weeks before shifting to proxies or guerrilla tactics—options that lose effectiveness under sustained U.S. bombardment. That said, U.S. stockpiles aren’t endless either. The Wall Street Journal highlighted low interceptor reserves (Patriot, THAAD) from prior commitments, so expect selective, high-impact use on both sides even if the campaign stretches months.
On the surface, the Iran move is obvious: neutralize a hostile regime and eliminate nuclear risks. But like in Risk, this feels like part of a larger play.
Trump and Xi are slated for up to four meetings this year, starting late March. Both sides are posturing hard as the world’s top economies gear up for talks. They’re channeling Theodore Roosevelt: “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” Last month I noted the renminbi’s steady climb over the past three months—it feels like a Chinese signal that they want productive meetings. At the same time, state media pushed reports on elevating the renminbi as a reserve currency (a long-shot threat to the dollar, but it is possible over years via Hong Kong equity purchases to erode dominance gradually).
Trump’s counter-signal: treating Taiwan more as a transactional partner than a sacred ally—an olive branch for smoother talks. But Iran offered a real leverage opportunity in that small window. China imports 1.38 million barrels per day from Iran—about 13% of its crude—at an $8-10 discount thanks to sanctions and shadow fleets. All of it routes through the Strait of Hormuz, now effectively disrupted. A successful regime change in Iran, combined with Venezuela already under U.S. sway, would force China to pay full market rates for a big chunk of its oil—or even buy more from the U.S. directly.
It’s far-fetched to claim the administration orchestrated this sequence perfectly (Venezuela to Iran to China pressure). More realistically, they’ve been aggressive in seizing opportunities that shift the board in their favor.
While Iran headlines will dominate for weeks, investors should look beyond the noise to Trump-Xi developments. The real contest is U.S.-China, and it’s heating up globally: Panama Canal influence, Venezuela, Iran, Greenland, Cuba (are they next?) and now Africa. In the past year, the U.S. has ramped up moves there—securing access to coltan, copper, and cobalt in the DRC (via the Strategic Partnership Agreement and Orion Consortium stakes in major mines), new critical minerals frameworks with Guinea and Morocco, major DFC funding for the Lobito Atlantic Railway to unlock Copperbelt exports, and even counterterrorism ops in places like Nigeria (public airstrikes on ISIS targets last December, followed by troop deployments for training). China has long used its chokehold on critical minerals and rare earths as a bargaining chip in negotiations. The U.S. is countering that—securing oil sources which helps rebalance the board back. After all, economic activity is energy transformed.
Move… counter-move…
