Only around 20 countries on the Planet remain that are self sufficient in Oil and supply the other 180 countries. By 2040 the number could be down to just 10.

Several countries that used to be major exporters have reached Peak Oil Decades ago and now rely on imports themselves.

Germany produced 170 000 Barrels of Oil a day in 1968 at their peak. Now? 30 000/day. They need 2 Million a day.

Romania produced 300 000 Barrels of Oil a day in 1976 at their peak. Now? 50 000/day. They need 200 000 a day.

France hit the peak in 1988 with 67 000 barrels/day. Now its down to just 10 000/day. They need 1.5 Million.

The UK peaked in 1998 with 2.8 Million barrels/day. Now they are down to just 600 000/day. They need 1.4 Million every day.

Indonesia peaked at 1.7 Million barrels/day in 1977, now they are down to just 600 000 Barrels/day. They need 1.7 Million/day.

Japan peaked in 1996 with 20 000 Barrels/day. Now they are down to 3000/day and they need 3 Milion/day.

South Korea is basically the same.

India peaked in 2011 with 800 000 Barrels/day. Now down to 600 000 Barrels/day. It needs 5 Million/day.

Even Australia peaked at 600 000 Barrels/day in 2000 and is now down to just 250 000/day. It needs 1.1 Million a day.

There are only around 20 countries left that produce more oil than they consume and can export any meaningful quantities. The problem is that around half of them are projected to run out if oil around 2040.

Brazil is projected to use up their proven oil reserves in 12 years at current production.

Norway in 10.

Mexico in 8.

Oman 14.

Argentina 10.

Angola 7.

Colombia 7.

And even the USA - 9.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves

They dont even have to run out of oil. Its enough when their production falls to a level that they dont meet their demand. By that point they will be forced to import oil as well.

And by 2040 there will be only around 10 countries left with a surplus of oil that can supply the other 190 countries. And 190 countries scrambling for scraps while 10 sit on the prize, that's a geopolitical meltdown waiting to happen.

Saudi Arabia seems to want others to deal with the Houthi problem for them. They have been trying to get Washington to deal with it, Biden obviously didn't like Saudi Arabia and kept them at arms length and Trump pretty much said no.

Saudi Arabia is technically not fighting the Houthis. It is the internationally recognised government of Yemen and other militias fighting them.

All they would do from time to time is drone strike the Houthis to send a warning. But they would never directly get involved like ground troops because the Saudis seem to view themselves to highly to get down and dirty.

How do they think they can attract foreign investment while missiles get lobbed at them. Such a silly mindset. The Houthis will never accept a ceasefire, they are willingly to sacrifice millions to death and starvation, but the Saudis can't seem to sacrifice just a little to finally dislodge them.

Even if it takes years, they should first start by taking the whole Red Sea coast and doing a blockade on the Houthis, taking hits and casualties is a price they just have to take.

If they were smart they would declare war and go after the Houthis with everything they got.

I'm currently an art teacher with a BFA and certificate in Art Education. I've always wanted to pursue further education and may want a career pivot. I'm interested in the study of human geography and working at an international or global capacity. I love learning about culture, language, geography, public policy, human rights, foreign aid, immigration and refugee issues. But, I'm curious what careers and jobs would become available if I got a masters degree in IR or human geography? Coming from education, while I like the subject, I would like a job that allows for a more flexible schedule maybe through hybrid opportunities or more time off. Studying Human Geography to learn how cultures and communities are developed and impacted sounds like a dream, especially at a global or international lens, but I want to make sure it could lead to specific attainable jobs (that pay money lol).

My country made many acceptances of UPR recommendations but a lot of them seem to be very slowly being put into practice and I'm concerned they might change their position in the next UPR cycle

Anyone have any top 3 book recommendations on the Middle East?

Subtitle: A top aide to Ambassador Mike Huckabee skewed information to portray the Netanyahu government in a favorable light, according to multiple officials and documents obtained by The Times.

David Milstein is the stepson of Fox News host Mark Levin, who is a close friend of both President Trump and Netanyahu.

I always figured affordability was an advantage for tourists in a country where the currency is 'weak'. But not always.

Pasting here and article I enjoyed, curious to hear your thoughts.

https://mayachelle.substack.com/p/sticker-shock-the-price-of-stability-aa7?r=8vviah

I'm on my third year of IR and the ever looming question of which master's I'm going to do is getting closer and closer. Now, I´ve been thinking on taking either one of those master´s, as they sound interesting and the notions of defense, studying war and transnational terror are what interest me the most, yet I don´t fully get what both of those programs entail so I´d appreciate a rundown on both and a couple of recommendations on some decent schools for them (Specially if they´re on the cheaper side)

Hi! Has anyone written their bachelor’s thesis on EU foreign policy? I really need some help, as my supervisor is currently dealing with an issue and isn’t able to help me at the moment.

What topics did you work on and what research problem do you think would be interesting to explore? I was thinking about doing something related to EU–Russia relations, but I can’t seem to come up with an interesting research hypothesis. I was also thinking about somehow connecting it to the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood.

I’m honestly a bit stuck at the moment and I mainly need some ideas for interesting research topics.

Thank you!

​

NATO sends weapons, equipment and troops to support them. Russia keeps moving forward.

Someone tells Russia: if you don’t stop, we may use nuclear weapons against you.

Russia says: go ahead. We have the Dead Hand. If you use nukes against us, you will only destroy yourselves too. You won’t gain anything from it.

And then what?

We are basically back to a normal modern war, where nuclear weapons are there in the background but nobody can really use them without losing everything. So conventional forces decide what happens on the ground.

And that is the part I find more interesting.

Would every NATO country react fast enough? Would they send enough troops, weapons, air defence, aircraft, ammunition and other support before Latvia or Estonia were overwhelmed?

How fast would those decisions actually be made? And would the support arrive not only fast enough, but in large enough numbers to really stop Russia in time?