What Surprise is in Store for the 2025 Year of the Wooden Snake?

 

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur (The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived) —Sebastian Brant (also Brandt) 

In this issue

What Surprise is in Store for the 2025 Year of the Wooden Snake?

I. 2025: The Year of the Wooden Snake, Zodiac Cycles and Sociology

II. Trump 2.0 and Current Geopolitical Developments

III. Geopolitical Milestones in the Year of the Snake

IV. The Influence of the Year of the Snake on the Global Economy and Financial Markets

V. The Impact of the Year of the Snake on Philippine Politics and Economy

VI. A Comparative Analysis of the Year of the Snake's Impact on the Philippines

VII. Conclusion

What Surprise is in Store for the 2025 Year of the Wooden Snake?

How will the 2025 Year of the Snake impact geopolitics, the global economy, and financial markets? Will it be a year of upheaval or opportunity for the Philippines?

I. 2025: The Year of the Wooden Snake, Zodiac Cycles and Sociology

2025 is the Year of the Wooden Snake. To gain insight into what this might signify, a quote from the article offers a succinct summary. 

Chinese new year 2025 is an especially fortuitous one as it is ruled over by the wood snake, a sign associated with wisdom, intuition, and renewal. It’s a combination of an animal (the snake) and an element (wood) that occurs once every 60 years. It promises to be a period full of unique energy with some distinct characteristics…The combination of snake and wood creates a special synergy in which the introspective and transformative energy of the snake is paired with wood’s expansive and balanced nature. (Mendoza, 2025)

Optimism consistently pervades the annual forecasts for the Chinese zodiac calendar. The zodiac embodies a 12-year cycle, each year symbolized by an animal and its associated attributes.

While we remain agnostic about this tradition (and its geomantic counterpart, feng shui), significant events occurring within the year might appear as circumstantial coincidences or could indeed signal potential cyclical patterns within the political economy. 

In other words, certain aspects of astrology might intersect with sociological phenomena. 

For instance, our analysis of geopolitical developments through the lens of the Chinese zodiac cycles fortuitously resulted in our accurate prediction of the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine War in February 2022. 

Aside from the eroding concerns over the pandemic, potential geopolitical flashpoints for a hot war may occur.  

For instance, the US-Russian impasse over Ukraine (Russia’s vehement objection over the slippery slope of NATO’s expansion into her borders) (Prudent Investor, January 2022) 

Thus, an examination of global and local developments over 12-year cycles may provide valuable clues for 2025. 

II. Trump 2.0 and Current Geopolitical Developments

Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 47th President of the United States will be held on January 20th, just 9 days ahead of the Chinese New Year on January 29th. This timing suggests that at the start of his term, he will busily sign numerous Executive Orders (EOs) that could significantly influence the geopolitical landscape this year. 

Even before taking office, geopolitical developments have already moved in anticipation of his potential actions.

Israel and Hamas have agreed to a ceasefire, which takes effect on Sunday, January 19th—469 days after the conflict began on October 7, 2023. President-elect Trump reportedly had significant influence over this deal. 

Still, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has publicly stated that the ceasefire with Hamas, as discussed with Trump, is intended to be "temporary." 

The incoming president is also reportedly considering easing sanctions on Russian oil exports in exchange for a peace deal with Ukraine, while simultaneously exerting pressure on Iran and Venezuela. 

While the incoming cabinet has reportedly been filled with pro-Israel lackeys and are hostile towards relations with China and Russia, Trump recently posted a video on his X account suggesting that the Syria and Iraq wars were orchestrated by Israel’s Netanyahu. 

Trump also had a phone call with China’s President Xi on January 17th, where both leaders declared on X.com they would “do everything possible to make the world more peaceful and safe.”

Following the sudden collapse of Assad-led Syria, Russian President Putin and Iranian President Raisi signed a “comprehensive partnership agreement” on January 17th, likely aimed at deterring any potential aggression from the U.S.-Israel alliance

Donald Trump has added complexity to geopolitics by exerting pressure on his allies. 

1. He has cited the need to pursue the acquisition of the Panama Canal.

2. Beyond securing access to critical mineral resources, Trump has proposed the acquisition of Greenland and the annexation of Canada, potentially to extend the U.S. sphere of influence in the Arctic Circle, competing with Russia. This strategy might also serve to divert attention from escalating war tensions with Russia and China.

As historian Eric Margolis suggested, "Trump has started a scramble of imperial rebranding"

3. Additionally, Trump has urged NATO members to increase their defense spending to 5% of GDP.

4. Could the alleged snubbing of the Philippine leadership at Trump’s inauguration signal a potential shift in US-Philippines foreign relations?

Trump's presidency promises to be a period of intense geopolitical activities, where traditional alliances might be tested, and new power dynamics could emerge, all under the ambitious and often unpredictable deal-making leadership of the 47th President of the United States.

III. Geopolitical Milestones in the Year of the Snake

Based on historical analysis and considering the cyclical nature of the Chinese zodiac, here are significant geopolitical milestones that occurred in various Years of the Snake: 

1917: The United States joined the Allies and entered World War I in April 1917. This was a pivotal moment that contributed to the eventual end of the war.

1941: The Bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, prompted the U.S. entry into World War II, significantly altering the course of the conflict.

Operation Barbarossa: Launched on June 22, 1941, this was Nazi Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union, marking the beginning of a massive Eastern Front campaign in World War II. This operation was one of the largest military operations in history and had profound effects on the war's outcome.

The Battle of Moscow, marking a turning point on the Eastern Front for the Russians against the invading Germans in World War II, also took place in (October 2) 1941-42. This battle was crucial for halting the German advance into the Soviet Union.

1953: The Korean War concluded with an armistice agreement on July 27, 1953, ending three years of conflict and setting the stage for the division of Korea that persists today.

1965: The U.S. significantly escalated its involvement in the Vietnam War in 1965, marking a major expansion of American military presence in Southeast Asia.

1989: The Tiananmen Square Massacre in China, from April 15 to June 4, 1989, involved the violent suppression of pro-democracy protests, impacting China's international image and domestic politics.

The Fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, marked the end of the Cold War and was a precursor to the reunification of Germany, signaling the decline of the Soviet sphere of influence in Eastern Europe. 

2001: The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, devastated the U.S., leading to the initiation of the War on Terror. This event reshaped global security dynamics.

The War in Afghanistan began 1-month later that year as the U.S. response to the 9/11 attacks, marking the start of a long-term military engagement in the region.

2013: The Syrian Civil War saw increased international involvement in 2013, with discussions around chemical weapon use and subsequent military actions, further complicating the conflict.

The Snake is often linked with transformation, introspection, and unpredictability, suggesting that geopolitical tensions might rise or escalate. The Wood element, associated with growth and expansion, could also signify potential for new power struggles. On the other hand, the introspective nature of the Snake might promote diplomatic efforts and peace negotiations, leading to the conclusion of ongoing conflicts.

In sum, the impact of the Year of the Wood Snake will depend on a complex array of interdependent factors, including global political dynamics, the influence of vested interest groups such as the military-industrial complex, hegemonists, and political elites, as well as leadership decisions and international diplomacy. This year tends to bring significant changes, with the potential for new conflicts to emerge, existing wars to escalate, and the possibility of resolving ongoing disputes, reflecting the intricate interplay of forces during this zodiac cycle.

IV. The Influence of the Year of the Snake on the Global Economy and Financial Markets

The influence of the Year of the Snake on the global economy and financial markets have been significant

1929: The U.S. stock market crash of 1929 precipitated the Great Depression, causing global economic devastation, massive unemployment, and profound financial instability. 

1941: U.S. economic mobilization for World War II marked a shift toward a war economy. This also resulted in increased U.S. wartime financing through the issuance of war bonds, a growing national debt and the Fed’s financial repression policies.

World War II also led to the U.S. Lend-Lease Act, which strengthened economic ties between the U.S. and Allied nations. 

1965: Often cited as part of the Golden Age of capitalism, 1965 marked a peak in the post-WWII economic boom in Western nations, particularly the U.S. and Europe.

Figure 1

The Bretton Woods System started showing signs of strain mounting due to inflationary pressures and vastly increased spending related to the Vietnam War. (Figure 1, upper graph)

1977: Following the Nixon Shock in 1971, the post-Bretton Woods era led to U.S. dollar weakness and inflationary pressures.

1989: The fall of the Berlin Wall paved the way for Germany's economic reunification. 

Global market liberalization advanced, emphasizing free trade and deregulation.

Despite the Bank of Japan's monetary tightening, the Nikkei 225 reached an all-time high of 38,957.44 on December 29, 1989, amidst a Tokyo land price crash. 

2001: The bursting of the Dot-Com Bubble led to a recession, with considerable stock market losses, particularly in tech stocks, and an eight-month U.S. economic contraction.

The 9/11 attacks further destabilized global markets.

China's accession to the WTO significantly expanded its global trade presence.

2013: The "Taper Tantrum" occurred when Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke announced a potential reduction in bond purchases, causing U.S. bond yields to rise and leading to instability in emerging markets.

The U.S. Dollar Index (DXY), which tracks the value of the U.S. dollar against a basket of six major trading partners' currencies, began its nearly 12-year uptrend in 2013. (Figure 1, lower image) 

Meanwhile, the Eurozone crisis persisted, with Greece and other nations continuing to face financial instability.

The Year of the Snake has historically been associated with heightened volatility in both geopolitics and domestic politics, and its interconnectedness with economics reveals similar underlying dynamics.

Historically, periods marked by surging asset bubbles, financial system pressures, recessions, and rapid economic expansion have all been part of this recurring cycle.

Looking ahead to 2025, uncertainties abound. However, the growing deep-seated economic imbalances—characterized by unprecedented debt levels, record deficits, and central bank policies favoring easy money—along with rising protectionism, the weaponization of finance, and speculative asset bubbles, all point to an increased risk of significant downside volatility.

V. The Impact of the Year of the Snake on Philippine Politics and Economy

How has the year of the Snake affected the Philippines.

1929: The Great Depression severely impacted the Philippine economy, which was still a U.S. colony, due to its dependence on U.S. markets.

1941: Imperial Japan launched a surprise attack on Clark Field and Iba Field on the opening day of hostilities in the Philippines, a day after the attack on Pearl Harbor. This paved the way for the Japanese occupation, causing massive socio-economic devastation.

1953: Former Defense Secretary Ramon Magsaysay was elected as the seventh President of the Philippines. The post-World War II economic recovery was still underway, with the country grappling with the repercussions of the war, including ongoing rebuilding efforts.

1965: Ferdinand Marcos Sr. was elected the tenth President of the Philippines. His victory marked the beginning of a long tenure in power, eventually leading to the declaration of martial law in 1972.

1977: Since the establishment of Martial Law in 1972, the administration of Ferdinand Marcos Sr. had suppressed political dissent and controlled growing unrest, which resulted in widespread human rights violations.

During this period, the Philippine economy was characterized by massive government spending on infrastructure projects, largely funded through loans. This led to rising external debt, which became a significant issue in the later years of Marcos' rule. In 1977, Marcos issued Presidential Decree 1177, which mandated automatic appropriations for debt servicing. 

The imposition of Martial Law coincided with economic instability, partly exacerbated by the global oil crisis, high inflation, and escalating debt levels.

1989: The late 1980s were marked by political turmoil and growing opposition to the regime of Corazon Aquino, who had assumed power after the 1986 People Power Revolution (People Power I).

In 1989, the Reform Armed Forces of the Philippines (RAFP) launched the most serious coup attempt against the Aquino government, among many previous attempts, highlighting dissatisfaction with her leadership and resistance to her reforms.

Despite Aquino's efforts to stabilize the economy, the country continued to face persistent challenges, including high levels of foreign debt and inflation. However, Aquino’s administration made significant strides in implementing market-oriented reforms and privatizing state-run enterprises, though the country still struggled due to global economic conditions and internal political instability.

2001: In January 2001, President Joseph Estrada was ousted in a second People Power Revolution, also known as People Power II, after being accused of corruption. Estrada’s impeachment and subsequent removal from office, amid widespread public protests, marked a significant political transition. Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was sworn in as the new president, though the transition was accompanied by significant political unrest and instability.

At the time, the Philippines was grappling with substantial economic challenges, including the aftermath of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis and declining investor confidence during Estrada's administration.

Figure 2

2013: The Philippine economy showed robust growth, reaching a significant milestone with an upgrade to an investment-grade credit rating by major rating agencies.  (Figure 2, topmost chart)

The economy grew at an impressive rate of 6.8% for the year.

Simultaneously, Philippine assets reached key milestones, reflecting strong investor confidence in the market during this period.

The Philippine Stock Exchange’s PSEi 30 had a record-breaking year, hitting new highs in May 2013. (Figure 2, middle diagram)

The Philippine peso rallied to a five-year high, or the US dollar-to-Philippine peso exchange rate fell to a five-year low. (Figure 2, middle chart)

In April 2013, Philippine 10-year bond yields hit all-time lows or Philippine bonds rallied to historic highs. (Figure 2, lowest graph)

In my humble opinion, 2013 signified the genuine bull market peak of the PSEi 30, which has been affirmed by both the USD-PHP exchange rate and the bond markets.

Once again, like its global counterparts, the Year of the Snake in the Philippines has historically coincided with moments of political upheaval, such as the rise and fall of leaders, coup attempts, and the People Power Revolution, as well as economic challenges and heightened volatility like inflation, debt, instability, and periods of market euphoria.

VI. A Comparative Analysis of the Year of the Snake's Impact on the Philippines

Finally, let us provide a concise analysis of the comparative performances during the Year of the Snake.

Nota Bene: The underlying dynamics behind each economic statistic differ from period to period.

Figure 3

The headline GDP experienced its best performance post-independence from the U.S. and post-bellum or post-war recovery in the Water Snake year of 1953, which saw an 8.9% GDP growth. (Figure 3, upper window)

With the exception of 2001, the headline GDP has been rising since then, with 2013 representing its highest level.

However, the Water Snake year of 1953 was followed by a sharp decline in the Wooden Snake year of 1965. If history follows its pattern, could we witness a sharp drop in GDP? Or will the uptrend since 1965 continue?

The average headline GDP during the Year of the Snake since 1953 stands at 5.4%.

Could the Year of the Snake also reflect trends in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) cycle?

The CPI surged from its trough in the Wooden Snake year of 1965 to its peak of 10.7% in 1989, before descending to 2.6% in the Water Snake year of 2013.

Does this suggest a cyclical pattern of three Snake years (or every 24 years)? Or could the CPI rise sharply in the upcoming Wooden Snake year? (Figure 3, lower chart)

The average CPI during the Year of the Snake since 1965 is 6%.

Figure 4

The USD-PHP exchange rate seems inclined to appreciate during the Year of the Snake. It gained in three of the last four Snake years, averaging 4.6%, particularly due to the 2001 return, which coincided with the weakest GDP performance among Snake years. (Figure 4, upper pane)

Moving to the PSE. Since its largest return of 31.24% in 1989, the Philippine’s major equity benchmark, the PSEi 30 has struggled. However, despite its mixed performance, the five Year of the Snake episodes since 1965 have yielded an average return of 4.1%, thanks in large part to the notable gains in 1989. (Figure 4, lower graph)

The Snake years reveal that the USD-PHP's largest returns, the weakest GDP, and the most significant decline in the PSEi 30 share a common denominator: the Metal Snake year of 2001.

Key global events—such as the bursting of the dot-com bubble, the dot-com recession in the U.S., the 9/11 attacks, and local political upheaval in the Philippines marked by People Power 2, alongside the country's post-Asian Crisis economic challenges in 2001—contributed to this outcome. 

VII. Conclusion

In examining the economic patterns associated with the Year of the Snake in the Philippines, we observe a tapestry of significant historical events and economic indicators. From the peak GDP growth in 1953 to the financial turbulence of 2001 and to the financial euphoria of 2013, these years have often been marked by notable shifts in political power, economic policy, market cycles and external shocks with each year adding a unique chapter to the country's economic and political story.

As we look towards 2025, while historical trends provide valuable insights, the future remains uncertain. Given the current global and domestic economic imbalances, the Year of the Snake may again usher in another period of heightened risk and potential volatility. As always, the interplay of external events, governmental actions, and market responses will determine whether the Snake’s legacy of upheaval or opportunity will prevail. 

____

References

Corina Mendoza Architectural Chinese new year 2025: Here's what to expect in the year of the Wood Snake January 1 2025 

Prudent Investor, What Surprise is in Store for the 2022 Year of the Water Tiger? January 23, 2022 

Other Zodiac series

What Surprise is in Store for the 2023 Year of the Water Rabbit? January 22, 2023

What Surprise is in Store for the 2024 Year of the Wooden Dragon? February 11, 2024

 

The Possible Impact of the Israel-Palestine War on the Philippines

 

The Israeli policy over recent years did not necessarily want to cultivate a Palestinian leadership... Many are in prison, and Israel's interest - because I repeat: it was not in their program or in Israel's interest at the time, or so they thought - was instead to divide the Palestinians and ensure that the Palestinian question fades. This Palestinian question will not fade. And so we must address it and find an answer. This is where we need courage. The use of force is a dead end. The moral condemnation of what Hamas did - and there's no "but" in my words regarding the moral condemnation of this horror - must not prevent us from moving forward politically and diplomatically in an enlightened manner. The law of retaliation is a never-ending cycle—Dominique De Villepin, former Prime Minister of France 

 

In this issue 

The Possible Impact of the Israel-Palestine War on the Philippines 

I. The Increasing Trend of Wars; Nakba 1.0: The Origin of the Israel-Palestine Conflict 

II. Nakba 2.0: The Israel-Palestine War: The Prison Revolt 

III. Divide and Conquer Rule: Israel Created, Nurtured and Fought the Hamas 

IV. The Global Sympathy War 

V. The Collective Punishment of The Palestinians 

VI. The Law of Large Numbers, Rising Risks of Direct World War 3 

VII. The Middle East Conflict as Symptom of the "Thucydides Trap" 

 

That's the outline.

Due to the risk of "community guideline" restrictions, please read the whole post at my substack.

Please press the following link:

https://open.substack.com/pub/theseenandunseenbybjte/p/the-possible-impact-of-the-israel?r=9066v&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

US Finances Israel’s Gaza War via Foreign Aid

The Israel Central Bank estimates the cost of the Gaza War to the Israel at $1.4 billion

From Reuters: The month-long Gaza war cost Israel's economy some $1.44 billion (855.51 million British pound), its central bank governor Karnit Flug said on Thursday, citing interim assessments. "The assessment is that it can reach up to around 0.5 percent of GDP, which is up to 5 billion shekels," Flug told Israel's Channel Ten television.

The CCTV has higher projections. They see that the costs of the war to Israel’s economy will accrue to $3 billion.

For Gaza the assessed cost has been at $ 6 billion, according to Haaretz.com

 

I’ll apply Murphy’s law here where “anything you try to fix will take longer and cost you more than you thought.”

Why? Because of the political economic dimension behind the war.

Of course, wars haven’t just been about damage to property or cost of armaments, the most important costs are people’s lives.

Nonetheless for Israeli politicians “costs” will likely be a less important consideration, why?

Well, because the “costs” to Israel have been financed by the US government via foreign aid.

2015 Foreign Aid has been appraised at $ 3.1 billion, which seems higher than those "cost" assessments.

As the Vox.com reports: (bold mine)

Even Egypt and Pakistan are not, in the grand scheme of things, particularly poor countries. It's just that American foreign aid mostly isn't economic assistance to needy people or needy countries. If it were, India would get more aid than Israel and Haiti would get more aid than Egypt.

Instead, the bulk of the money is spent on buying American military equipment, serving as a kind of indirect subsidy to the military-industrial complex. That's part of how a country like Israel that isn't objectively hard-up for money winds up getting more assistance than anyone else. Israel does have a healthy appetite for advanced military hardware, and it's considered a geopolitically reliable nation that can be trusted with it. So American foreign policy is committed to helping Israel maintain a qualitative military advantage vis-à-vis other Middle Eastern countries. Meanwhile, part of the Carter-era Camp David Accords is a guarantee of a lot of money to the Egyptian military to keep it favorably disposed to a pro-American foreign policy and détente with Israel.

The incentive to go to war is there because of subsidies provided to the Israel government. Consequently, such subsidies enriches the highly influential US military industrial complex. Take away those phony "foreign aid" and the incentive to go to war will most likely diminish. Perhaps the warring parties will learn how to use the markets and trade in order to develop cooperation instead of destroying each other.

And you can also see, foreign aid "flows" reveal that the US hasn’t been helping the poor, but rather helping nations allied to their goals of promoting their role as de facto “global policeman” regardless of their economic conditions.

And it could even be interpreted that the Gaza war could signify a proxy-surrogate war by the US channeled through Israel.

War is indeed a racket

Read more about the modern roots of Israel-Arab conflict from the dean of the Austrian school of economics Murray N. Rothbard here

Michael Rozeff: US Implements the Wolfowitz Doctrine

Retired Professor and author Michael Rozeff on the undeclared "Wolfowitz Doctrine" as blueprint to US imperial foreign policy.

From the Lew Rockwell Blog (bold mine)

The U.S. is implementing the Wolfowitz Doctrine. It aims to maintain the U.S. as the sole superpower and to preclude any regional powers. It wants no rivals such as Russia, Iran and China. This agenda is primary for the U.S. Other purported goals of foreign policy such as anti-terrorism, furthering democracy, advancing human rights, and the self-determination of peoples are useful only insofar as they advance the superpower status of the U.S. and the elimination of rivals. Whenever the Wolfowitz Doctrine can be implemented by sacrificing anti-terrorism, democracy, human rights and self-determination, the U.S. does not hesitate to sacrifice them. This is why the U.S. appears to be so hypocritical.

Here is an example out of today’s news. The U.S. condemns separatism in Ukraine and aids Kiev in attacking its own people with heavy and advanced weapons of all kinds. This is because the superpower agenda is served by steering Ukraine into the Western camp. At the very same time, the U.S. condemns China for indicting a professor who is a vocal separatist and critical of Chinese policy in Xinjiang. Hence, we observe the U.S. against separatism in Ukraine but supporting it in China. This is because the U.S. is applying pressure on China wherever it thinks this will succeed in diminishing China as a power. If China has to contend with breakaway movements, the U.S. agenda is advanced.

Numerous other instances of U.S. hypocrisy can be understood in this way. The U.S. will support democracy but then ignore elections and support dictators. It will bemoan the deaths of children in some instances but support their being killed in others. It will condemn interfering in domestic politics in some countries but approve of it in other instances. It will condemn terrorism and then arm terrorists. This is because the overriding agenda is the Wolfowitz Doctrine.

The U.S. supplies the Israeli military with aid and ammunition so as to maintain Israel in the region and prevent regional powers like Iran from growing in strength. When Israel attacks Gaza, the U.S. approves a certain amount of death and destruction. However, if Israel’s killing becomes so excessive that it promises to cause a backlash that weakens Israel or gives rise to an anti-Israel movement that is more radical than Hamas, then the U.S. will switch and disapprove of Israel’s attack and seek to stop it. The criterion being used is that of the supremacy of U.S. power in a worldwide game of power.

This is not to say that the different divisions in Washington are united in this goal or united in how to play this game. It’s not to say that the Wolfowitz Doctrine is sensible. It’s not to say that important leaders are playing this game effectively. In most instances, they are playing it foolishly, rashly, dangerously and in a very costly way that results in diminishing U.S. power. This exclusive superpower goal and game generally reduces American well-being in numerous ways. From that standpoint, the Wolfowitz Doctrine is deeply flawed.

Daniel Adams also at the Lew Rockwell Blog also reveals that the US government just gave a green light to the Israeli government for the use armaments from a US government owned US $ 1 billion cache or “War Reserves Stocks Allies-Israel (WRSA-I) in the ghastly war with the Hamas at the Gaza. Reportedly 80% of the fatalities have been civilians as the military industrial complex benefits from sale of arms.

Sad to see how political (and politically based economic) greed has led to senseless slaughter of innocent lives.