A New Iran (Military?) Base Case

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Our central assumption for the Iran war had been that by end the third week of April at latest, the Iranian regime faction willing to make a deal in line with Trump’s

The Take

Jordan Calloway · Government Secrets & FOIA

# THE TAKE: Rabobank's Iran Fantasyland Michael Every's "base case" for Iranian collapse by late April? That's not analysis—it's wish-casting dressed in banker's prose. Let's be clear: Rabobank projected regime implosion on a *calendar deadline*. We're well past it. Iran's still standing. Their currency stabilized. Regional proxies intact. Every's framework ignores what actually matters: the IRGC doesn't face coup conditions. Sanctions hurt civilians, not military structures. And the assumption that internal fracture + external pressure = regime change by *date certain* is the kind of thinking that got us two decades deep in Afghanistan. Rabobank had financial exposure riding on escalation narratives. When your business model requires conflict premiums, your "base case" becomes self-interested fantasy. The receipts show: no April collapse. No imminent military intervention. Just another institution caught betting against Iran's survival capacity. Dead forecast. Moving on.

What the Documents Show

However, the likelihood of escalation to achieve that de-escalation is very high, which risks more energy supply damage. Trump just unilaterally and indefinitely extended the ceasefire, “based on the fact that the Government of Iran is seriously fractured,” which the Iranians didn’t request, but Pakistan did. In the Middle East, making a threat and not following through smacks of weakness, and will be noted (again) by Tehran’s hardliners. He added US attacks would be held off “until such time as their leadership and representatives can come up with a unified proposal.” That’s as a Saudi tweet claimed Ghalibaf and Pezeskhian, willing to negotiate with Trump, have been arrested by the IRGC. If true, that points to a unified Iranian position of defiance.

Follow the Money

That would then require a US response - either an attack or a 1956 Suez Crisis retreat . Of course, Iran may be incapable of a unified answer until its factions turn on each other (which is likely part of the US strategy) - that would also suggest the need for a US attack, to ‘shake the box’. Or this ceasefire extension can be a US deception as its forces continue to fly or sail into the region. Meanwhile, the US economic sanctions. Iran claims it will break its blockade by force, if it persists, which would of course lead us straight to an escalation again.

What Else We Know

Importantly, the threat of an extended throttling of Hormuz will increase the global pressure to act . On one hand, US allies might do something, though this seems unlikely. On the other, China may have to given it has already stated it wants Hormuz to reopen. Looked at like this, there is nothing for markets to savor about a ‘chicken TACO Tuesday ’. Indeed, screen oil prices only softened a little in response to the US ceasefire extension, and the price of physical oil and products in Asia will continue to rise unless Hormuz reopens. Yet it’s undeniable the extended ceasefire also points towards a true TACO, which we’ve long made clear would be a geopolitical earthquake on par with the 1956 Suez Crisis.

Primary Sources

• Source: ZeroHedge
• Category: Government Secrets
• Cross-reference independently — don't take our word for it.

Disclosure: NewsAnarchist aggregates from public records, API feeds (Federal Register, CourtListener, MuckRock, Hacker News), and independent media. AI-assisted synthesis. Always verify primary sources linked above.