Over troubled waters: Trump’s bridge-and-plant plot

Do you know what's worse than a podcast cliffhanger? A slow website. While we wait for your site to load, your customers just left. Don't let that be you. Ionos web hosting is built for speed and 99.9% uptime. Get professional hosting for just $1 a month. It's fast, reliable, and includes a personal consultant to help your business grow. Speed up at Ionos.com.

That's IONOS.com slash podcast and use code Talk10 today to save. The Economist Hello and welcome to the intelligence from The Economist. I'm your host, Jason Palmer. Every weekday, we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world.

That AI jobs apocalypse still ain't here. but where it seemed most likely was in India, which relies heavily on farming out its coders for cheap. But AI is allowing the country's big IT firms to change how they do business. They may be hiring more people, not fewer. And baking and bingo, knitting and crocheting, pottery painting and flour arranging. This is the stuff of young people these days.

We ask why Granny Corps is taking Gen Z by Sedate Storm. First up, though. President Donald Trump doesn't want you to know what he will do in Iran. Very little is off limits in Iran as far as targeting, including power plants, bridges, you've mentioned those. Very little is off limits. Are there certain kinds of civilian targets, though, I'm thinking... I don't want to tell you this. But he does want you to know what he could do.

We have a plan because of the power of our military, where every bridge in Iran will be decimated, where every power plant in Iran will be out of business, burning, exploding, and never to be used again. I mean, complete demolition by 12 o'clock. After an unprecedented, sweary Easter Sunday social media post, one that doesn't bear repeating here, he amped up his threats yesterday, suggesting that America could destroy Iran in one night.

And with one of his trademark moving deadlines, that night could be tonight. As ever, it's hard to know what Donald Trump is going to do. Greg Carlstrom is our Middle East correspondent and is in Qatar this morning. We are hours away now from this deadline that he has given the Iranians. there's always the possibility that it's postponed again, but it's very hard to see how the U.S. and Iran are going to get to some sort of a deal in the next few hours, and there is a real fear in this region that we're headed for a major escalation in the war. And what's clear about this as deadlines move around is that both sides seem to be claiming to be winning.

Is that even a sensible question to ask who's winning this war? Both sides can credibly claim to be at least achieving the things that they are setting out to do. The Iranians have been fighting this asymmetric war against the global economy, and their goals have been to be resilient, to keep fighting, and to inflict enormous costs on the region and on the world. And they've been able to do that. Just in the past few days, we've seen Iran attack a major petrochemical plant in Saudi Arabia, gas fields in Abu Dhabi, oil refineries, in Bahrain and.

Kuwait and the damage to the global economy is going to linger. The Americans and the Israelis, meanwhile, they are trying to batter not just Iran's military capabilities, but increasingly Iran's economy as well. And if you look at Iran's missile program, for example, yes, it is still able to fire missiles at Israel and the Gulf countries, but its ability to replenish those missiles after the war is in doubt because there has been a systemic campaign of the airstrikes against the factories, the supply chain that produces missiles in Iran. So they're both doing operationally what they set out to do, but they're not achieving their strategic aims yet. The Americans want to compel Iran essentially to surrender, to make a deal on favorable terms for the United States.

Iran, for its part, wants to stop this war and wants to prevent future wars without having to make major concessions, and they haven't been able to achieve that. And so the narrative on both sides is that they're winning, but in strategic terms, no one is winning yet. So this narrative of both sides claiming to be winning is what you'd expect in any war, I suppose. It is. I think what's striking about this one, though, is that the two sides are essentially fighting parallel wars, right? America and Israel are fighting Iran, and then Iran is fighting mostly its Gulf neighbors and the world economy. And so both sides can credibly claim to be winning their own war, even as they are simultaneously losing the other one. And we saw that

over the long weekend with this drama around the American F-15 that was shot down over Iran. The Iranians then started scouring the country, looking for the two downed airmen. America set into motion what sounds like a very complicated rescue operation. And it was a success in the end for the Americans. They brought back their two personnel without any loss of life on their part. It was a success for them. It was an embarrassment for Iran, which wasn't able to capture the pilot and the weapons officer. On Monday, we saw Donald Trump give this press conference at the White House, and it sounded almost like he was giving a mission accomplished speech, as if the entire purpose of this war had been about trying to rescue these two airmen.

And then meanwhile, the Iranians tried to spin this as a failure for America because the number of American planes were blown up during the rescue operation. And so this was a lot of a very rare moment in this conflict where the two sides were actually directly fighting each other instead of fighting these parallel wars, and they both looked for a way to spin it somehow to their advantage. But looking through the spin, Greg, where do you see the balance of power at the moment? I'm not sure we can say anyone has it yet. I mean, the costs on all sides have been enormous. On the American side, beyond the aircraft that were destroyed over the weekend in this rescue operation, America has lost a number of aerial refueling tankers. It's lost an E3, AWACS radar airplane, has less

than 20 of them in its arsenal. So losing one of them is a major loss. And when you speak to defense sources in the Gulf, they tell you the damage at some of the bases that the U.S. uses here. Aaldeid in Qatar, Prince Sultan, in Saudi Arabia, other bases, it's extensive. It's far more extensive than has been reported. So there is a blow to the American military. Stockpiles of interceptors and standoff munitions and other things that the U.S. is burning through at a very rapid clip, and that is going to have implications, if not for this war right now, for America's ability to fight future wars. Gulf states themselves are also suffering, obviously, enormous costs from this. We're all focused on what's happening to the oil and gas infrastructure in the

region because of what that means for the global economy. But you look beyond that, the damage to business in Gulf states where this war has scared off travelers, tourists, in some cases, even residents of Gulf countries who have left and may come back after the war, may not come back after the war. Governments are having to earmark billions and billions of dollars for economic support for struggling businesses in their countries. So there's a huge amount of economic damage, and then there's reputational damage for Gulf countries, which no longer look like oases of stability in the region. And those costs are going to be with. them for a long time to come. But it has to be said that there is a great deal of damage to Iran as well

at the same time. There is. And I think increasingly what's clear is that a long war is not just going to batter Iran's military capabilities. It is going to undermine the very foundations of Iran's economy. America and Israel have attacked the largest steel mills in the country. They've attacked its natural gas fields, its main petrochemical processing plant, one of its most prestigious universities, and losing those steel mills, for example, the best case scenario is that they will be out of commission for a year. That means one of Iran's largest sources of non-oil export revenue will not be producing. It usually brings in about $7 billion a year in export revenue. It also fuels a number of other domestic industries. Iran makes lots of cars. It has a big

construction industry, all of that is downstream from steel production, and all of that is going to be affected. And we're already hearing reports of companies in Iran that are laying off workers because they will not have access to raw materials anymore. And so the consequences of all of this are going to ripple through the Iranian economy, which even before the war had very high unemployment rate, had inflation that was running close to 50%, food prices going up even faster, add to that thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of families that no longer have an income. And the economic consequences of this are going to be enormous. And this is before we get to Donald Trump's threats of knocking out the Iranian power grid. Well, exactly that. This sounds on both sides like a

fairly unsustainable situation. And when we've spoken to you in the past about this, so we've sort of laid out three possible paths, escalation, staying the course as it is, or finding a way out, finding peace. At this moment, which do you think, think is most likely. Escalation seems like the most likely path that we're going down. There has been another last-ditch effort to try and get to a deal. The latest proposal that's being discussed would be for a temporary ceasefire, maybe two or three weeks, and then the U.S. and Iran would use that time to try and negotiate a permanent ceasefire. The Iranians are not really interested in that. They want a permanent end, not just to this war, but to their whole state of conflict with the United

States. And so the idea that they might agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for a few weeks of truce, it's very hard to see them doing that. So I think we are headed down a path where this is likely to escalate. And if Donald Trump follows through on his threats, if he does what he said he's going to do, first of all, that will almost certainly qualify as a war crime. Bombing one power plant can be justified in military terms, bombing an entire country's electric grid as a way to pressure it into making a deal that is very much beyond the pale. If he does this, the consequences for Iran will be profound to its economy, to public health, and Iran again, does not have the resources to rebuild an electric grid if it is destroyed by the Americans.

Do you know what's worse than a podcast cliffhanger? A slow website. While we wait for your site to load, your customers just left. Don't let that be you. Ionos web hosting is built for speed and 99.9% uptime. Get professional hosting for just $1 a month. It's fast, reliable, and includes a personal consultant to help your business grow. Speed up at IONOS.com. That's IONOS.com slash podcast and use code Talk10 today to save.

For decades, the Indian IT industry has profited from labor arbitrage. Gavin Jackson is our South Asia Business and Economics correspondent. India has plenty of people, and many of them have advanced degrees in software engineers. The cost of hiring one of these people is a fraction of hiring the exact same sort of person in America. Indian businesses have profited by hucking up these smart, talented people with businesses in America and Europe. But now there's an even cheaper alternative, AI agents. Now, Gavin, we've talked a whole lot about AI agents on this show, and in particular how AI is going to be best of all, perhaps, at code.

and that that might in turn affect the IT industry in a general sense. Like, how is that looking so far? The tool that's causing a big stir in India's tech hub of Bangalore is called Claude Code. It's from Anthropic. And it can put together a software app, a prototype in minutes. But for it to run efficiently, securely, and so on, it requires deeper technical knowledge. But the worry for the industry is that if one skilled developer with Claude

can do the work of several developers, then businesses in America may find they have less need of the Indian IT. outsources. These are the guys who provide the most labor-intensive part of the software industry. But if there's a lot of fear on the ground, not a lot concrete is actually happening. This is starting to feel like a kind of running theme on this show about the AI doomsday scenarios not playing out yet. What's the bottleneck in this case? So one person I met was doing sales for these companies and he says you talk to the clients and the first thing they say is we want a 40% productivity gain. They want fewer people doing more work.

But when it comes to actually doing that, reality intrudes. Businesses are complicated things. They have legacy systems. They have regulatory duties. They have different systems that have to communicate with one another. And it seems like the AI agent struggles in that sort of scenario. So it turns out ClaudeCode isn't a plug-in-play sort of thing, which means the outsourters see this as an opportunity.

Reconfiguring businesses to use AI may turn out to be a big source of revenue for the consultants as well. One of the founders of the consulting firm, Inphesus, reckons AI-related services could be worth up to $400 billion by 2030. So there's sort of two things going on then. It's that the outsourcers, the bulk of the work that was supposed to get farmed out most quickly, isn't going so quickly, but also some of the value then accrues to sort of slightly up the IT chain. That's certainly what they're hoping. But the reality is when you look at the hard day to the results, all that kind of thing,

you just don't see anything really happening. Revenue is largely growing at the same place, headcount is growing at the same pace. You don't see anything in the hard numbers, despite all of this huge amount of talk about what's going on. But another part of this is a lot of India's IT industry isn't in the traditional outsourcing companies anymore. Instead, you have global capability centers. These are in-house outsourcers. So instead of going to an InfoSys, a Tata consultancy services, that kind of company, you set up your own base in India, hiring Indians directly. Instead of just shoving the grunt work out to one of these outsources,

they're moving their core business functions to these global capability centers where they can have more ownership over what's going on. The intellectual property stays within the company, the technical expertise stays within the company. And that's kind of because when the Indian outsources were getting started, software and IT was this new novel thing you were bolting on to an existing company. But now every company has to be a tech company. Retail sales have gone online,

distribution's gone online, marketing's gone online. So you're less willing to outsource that core business function to another company, but you want to keep it in-house. And so that means that even if Claude Code becomes the way that you do software development, it may still be an Indian engineer who's managing Claude Code, who's prompting it, who's refining its code and so on, but it may not be one of the outsourcers themselves who's doing it. So what people will get out of India is no longer just the sort of cheap coding labor,

but something more vertically integrated, services more than just code. I think there's sort of three lessons from India's experience with this. One is about technology. It takes a long time to implement technologies, and you have to reorient everything around the technology rather than just plug it in. Another is how India itself is trying to move up the value chain. It's gone from doing the most basic white-corner work

to doing more value-added stuff, stuff that involves more skill and probably involves a little bit more autonomy. Instead of just doing what you're told, India and IT companies have more ownership of the products they work on and create. And the third thing is just how valuable people will remain, even if you have ClaudeCode able to do a lot of the work, you've still got a lot of relatively cheap engineers in India. And if you can find something productive for them to do, you can probably make quite a lot of money doing so. So there's a big incentive to work out

whatever that is. Far from thinning out the ranks in these IT companies, the AI revolution may actually expand them. The thing is with all this AI stuff is that there's so much talk about possible futures and all of them are a little bit plausible. Ever since ChatGPT, debuted, the Indian outsourcers have been flagged as the sector most exposed to AI displacement. If you're worried about AI taking white-collar jobs, then these are exactly the white-collar jobs that you should be most worried about. But three years on, the disruption's not arrived. So even though it's not in the way people predicted, it does show the impact that AI is having on business. The tech may upend the industry, but its overall effect is unclear or uneven,

and there may not be big aggregate gains to be had. Thanks very much for your time, Gavin. Thank you so much for having me. So much for having me.

It's quite easy. If you need inspiration, you can also check my Instagram. In a bar near Hammersmith, we painted pottery and sipped on soft drinks. Between brush strokes, the conversation flowed. Caitlin Talbot is our digital culture correspondent. The demographic isn't what you might expect. Most of the members are Gen Z. They meet every few weeks to crochet, embroider, make candles, or paint pottery.

The club's founder says 90% of attendance. come alone to meet like-minded girls. Young people are taking up hobbies that are traditionally associated with retirees. Event bright, a global events marketplace, notes that baking, bingo and needlecraft are all on the rise. In Britain, the number of people who attended flower arranging classes in the year to July 2025, quadrupled compared with the previous year. And in America, there were two and a half times more. puzzle competitions. Even birding has become a hot girl hobby. There are 450,000 Gen Z Birdwatchers in Britain.

Granny Corps is not limited to entertainment. Young people respect the homeware and fashion choices of older generations. The latter includes lots of florals and cardigans. Some even holiday like old people, going on cruises, for instance. But why are the young so old at heart? Experts say young people embrace nostalgia or a yearning for a time that perhaps they didn't get to experience. Psychologists call this Anna Moyer. In an era of flashy screens, youngsters want the old things,

whether that's knitting or embroidery or watching birds. These activities might even lead to more genuine relationships. At events like the pottery class, experts reckon that there's a slower, more grounded sense of connection, just like the conversations you'd have with your grandma. There's even a therapeutic benefit to activities like knitting. In a world where everything seems to be speeding up, up. Some young people really do want to slow down.

That's all for this episode of the Intelligence. We'll see you back here tomorrow. Queen Carvania stood hallowed by the morning sun. An army hung on her every word. My champions, I have sold my chariot on Carvana. It was a lovely SUV, an inexplicably queenly offer. They're even coming to the castle, For collect it. Tonight we feast.

An offer you can feast on. Sell your car today on Carvana. Pick up these may apply. Do you know what's worse than a podcast cliffhanger? A slow website. While we wait for your site to load, your customers just left. Don't let that be you.

Ionos web hosting is built for speed and 99.9% uptime. Get professional hosting for just $1 a month. It's fast, reliable, and includes a personal consultant to help your business grow. Speed up at Ionos.com. That's Ionos.com slash podcast and use code Talk 10 today to save.