Tina Fordham's own research found geopolitical shocks tripled in the years leading up to 2025, before Trump's second term began.
Most non-US investors she talks to assume the disruption is temporary. Her data says otherwise.
"One of the things I hear most often right now is, this is bad, but it'll all go away in 2028. That's not true if our geopolitics super cycle data and thesis is correct."
Fordham has advised markets, boards and C-suite leaders on geopolitical risk for more than 25 years and is the author of the new book Mad World: A Geostrategy Survival Guide for Leaders.
I listened to the full segment so you can skip it.
Here are the 4 arguments that matter.
👤 Guest: Tina Fordham, founder of Fordham Global Foresight and author of Mad World: A Geostrategy Survival Guide for Leaders
🎙️ Hosts: Tom Keene and Paul Sweeney, who anchor this edition of Bloomberg Surveillance
📰 Published: 10 September 2026 on the Bloomberg Surveillance YouTube channel
🔴 YouTube | ⏱️ 36 min
Key Takeaways
Her research found a tripling of geopolitical shocks before Trump 2.0 even began, published back in 2024
She rejects the common investor assumption that "it'll all go away in 2028"
The single biggest change for corporate leaders is the withdrawal of the US as the backstop for trade and security
She calls it invisible in the data today but visible "with your own eyes"
The US is trapped in Iran by its own unclear war aims, and a weaker power holding it at bay sends a signal worldwide
She names blowback and opportunism as the risk that follows
Europe's decline in trust toward the US is the biggest change she's tracking, dating to the Greenland developments
She says it rolls back 40-plus years of the transatlantic alliance, not just a policy dispute
1. Shocks Tripled Pre-Trump 2.0
Asked about her term "geopolitical super cycle," Fordham described research published well before the current administration.
The term borrows from commodities and astronomy. "This is my term, obviously used in this context most often for commodities, but in astronomy, it refers to expansion. And we published this research back in 2024 because we observed through a database that we constructed and our analytical approach, a tripling of geopolitical shocks before the 2025 and Trump 2.0."
She hears the same dismissal from non-US investors constantly. "Based in Europe, as I am talking to a lot of non-U.S. investors, one of the things I hear most often right now is, this is bad, but it'll all go away in 2028."
Her data says the trend predates and outlasts any one administration. "That's not true if our geopolitics super cycle data and thesis is correct, which is that this really started to accelerate after the global financial crisis. And as the kind of buffers to absorb geopolitical shocks get dismantled, eroded, the impact will be greater."
The research covers five categories of shock, built from a database that didn't exist before. "We looked at five types of shocks. As I say, we had to manually construct this database. It doesn't exist." She named climate events, conflict, state-sponsored cyber attacks, and tariffs and sanctions — the last of which "increased tenfold, again, before Liberation Day"
2. The US Backstop Is Gone
Asked whether today's world still resembles the post-World War II order corporate leaders grew up in, Fordham said no.
The old order has a name, and it's over. "So that's the Pax Americana in international relations terms."
The change is generational as much as geopolitical. "This book, Mad World, is also a great song from Generation X. This is a book for Generation X leaders in particular who are having... a great deal of trouble adjusting to the fact that the single biggest change is the withdrawal of the U.S. as the backstop for trade and security and what that means."
She argues the framing question itself is wrong. "That's why it's wrong to just focus on when will the Strait of Hormuz open? You know, when will Russia and Ukraine make a deal? Because the removal of that backstop, the erosion of trust in the U.S. as a guarantor is driving all kinds of new configurations of power, cooperation."
CIOs tell her it isn't showing up in the numbers yet, and she agrees — for now. "Lots of CIOs say to me, well, it's not in the data. No, it's not in the data yet. But we can map that and you can see it with your own eyes."
3. Iran, a Self-Made Trap
Asked how markets should read the standoff with Iran, Fordham was blunt about who is stuck.
The US cannot simply extract itself. "He can't. The United States is trapped in Iran of a trap of its own making because of the unclear war aims and everything else."
The precedent is Russia and Ukraine, run through the same lens of power. "You've got two military superpowers who assumed that these wars would be over quickly and that they would consolidate power. Now you've got the spectacle of a much weaker power in both cases. able to hold the greater power at bay, that does send a big signal around the world that the U.S. can't win against a country like Iran that has absorbed a lot of damage and been under sanctions for 40 years. To me, the risk is blowback and opportunism."
The cost to markets isn't really about the Strait of Hormuz itself. "As the Treasury Secretary said, alternatives to the Strait of Hormuz will be found, but that's not really the most important part. It's freedom of navigation. It's the monetization of choke points, which Iran has gained new leverage and revenue that it didn't have before, sends a signal to other powers."
4. Europe's Trust Won't Return
Asked how Europe is managing its exposure to Middle East energy, Fordham widened the answer to the transatlantic relationship itself.
The energy picture varies sharply by country. The UK has "extremely high electricity costs and did not kind of plan for a future like this," Spain invested early in renewables, and Germany is "suffering. from its choice back in the Merkel era to depend on Russian energy" — a legacy she linked to the "strong performance by an extreme right-wing party" in its recent elections
She names the threat directly. "Europe is under attack from Russia, make no mistake about it."
Northern Europe reads the risk very differently from the rest of the continent. "That's really different, though, in the Baltic states and Northern Europe. I was in Sweden and in Finland the last couple of weeks, in Denmark, totally different conversation."
The lasting change, in her view, is trust rather than any single dispute. "The decline in trust of the U.S. is probably the biggest change, and that has occurred since the Greenland developments that I've witnessed. You know, that rolls back 40 years or more of the transatlantic alliance and looking to the U.S. not just for, protection, but for partnership."
Bonus Insights
This is Fordham's own segment of a longer Bloomberg Surveillance episode that also carried separate interviews with PGIM's Greg Peters on the bond market, Citi's Heath Terry on AI infrastructure and Yacktman's Molly Pieroni on value investing, each written up on its own
Asked about Trump's promised $5,000 dividend, she called it politically shrewd regardless of the fiscal cost: "It worked in the Brexit campaign, don't forget. People did not focus on the warnings and the downside risks."
Fordham's bottom line is that the structural story for investors is not any single crisis but the accelerating erosion of the buffers and trust that used to absorb geopolitical shocks — a trend her own data says started well before the current administration and will outlast it.
Books & Resources Mentioned
Mad World: A Geostrategy Survival Guide for Leaders (Fordham's new book, published to coincide with the geopolitical super cycle she has tracked since 2024)
If this was worth your time, send it to someone who has to have a view on this.
Get the latest market chatter as it happens: