{"id":7417,"date":"2026-03-02T10:52:22","date_gmt":"2026-03-02T13:52:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/?post_type=cartas&#038;p=7417"},"modified":"2026-03-03T11:34:53","modified_gmt":"2026-03-03T14:34:53","slug":"a-nova-guerra-fria","status":"publish","type":"cartas","link":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/en\/asset-cartas\/a-nova-guerra-fria\/","title":{"rendered":"The New Cold War"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"wp-block-group has-global-padding is-layout-constrained wp-container-core-group-is-layout-eb5bab19 wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns artica-content-spaces artica-card-container is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-28f84493 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column artica-side-content is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\" style=\"flex-basis:365px\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-group artica-carta-media has-global-padding is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-4-3 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"A Nova Guerra Fria - Cartas Mensais #46\" width=\"500\" height=\"375\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/BDrrbZWwMTU?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-group artica-carta-toc has-pureza-background-color has-background has-global-padding is-layout-constrained wp-container-core-group-is-layout-09e94731 wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\" style=\"margin-bottom:0;padding-top:24px;padding-right:24px;padding-bottom:24px;padding-left:24px\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-group has-global-padding is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-group has-global-padding is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<nav class=\"wp-block-pycblocks-table-of-contents-pyc artica-toc artica-carta-toc has-rocha-color has-text-color has-link-color wp-elements-c70cd324dee04252ea13aa2f32908b7b\"><ol><li><span class=\"wp-block-table-of-contents__entry\">The New Cold War<\/span><\/li><li><span class=\"wp-block-table-of-contents__entry\">History of the Rivalry<\/span><\/li><li><span class=\"wp-block-table-of-contents__entry\">US and China GDP Evolution<\/span><\/li><li><span class=\"wp-block-table-of-contents__entry\">A Paradigm Shift<\/span><\/li><li><span class=\"wp-block-table-of-contents__entry\">What We Expect for the Future<\/span><\/li><li><span class=\"wp-block-table-of-contents__entry\">Impact on investments<\/span><\/li><\/ol><\/nav>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<div style=\"font-size:12px; padding-right:40px;padding-left:40px;\" class=\"wp-block-pycblocks-read-time-pyc\">\n      7&nbsp; min de leitura<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\" style=\"flex-basis:70px\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column artica-carta-text is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading has-noite-color has-text-color has-link-color wp-elements-0bb696668d9f4bf28c6810bcaf00d715\">The New Cold War<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-rocha-color has-text-color has-link-color wp-elements-a1aac46cf117dfc2bf765b8026adc378\"><strong>Dear investors,<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>When we read about history, each episode appears to have been clearly triggered by a notable event. The Second World War began on September 1, 1939, when Nazi Germany invaded Poland. The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union began on March 12, 1947, with the announcement of the Truman Doctrine. However, this clarity is largely the result of the didactic organization historians impose with the benefit of hindsight. The boundaries of historical episodes are far more blurred when experienced in the present.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The rivalry between the United States and China, quite obvious today, has been intensifying for more than a decade. Some argue we are heading toward a new world war; others contend that the conflict will remain\ncontained by the deep economic interdependence the two nations still share. It is difficult to predict how far things will go, but it is already clear that the rivalry has caused profound shifts in global geopolitics. We\nshare our reflections on those shifts and how they may shape the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">History of the Rivalry<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>In the 2000s, China was not a concern for the American government. In fact, the United States was the main architect of China\u2019s accession to the World Trade Organization in December 2001. The rationale at the time was that integrating China into the global economy would bring enormous cost advantages to\nAmerican companies through the exploitation of cheap Chinese labor, and that China\u2019s economic development within the global trading system would lead it to adopt Western practices and converge toward a democratic political regime. Neither prediction came true in the decades that followed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>China\u2019s economic development was faster and larger than anticipated. Between 2000 and 2025, China\u2019s GDP grew 16-fold, while that of the United States grew 3-fold. China went from representing 12% of the American economy to 64%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">US and China GDP Evolution<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"886\" height=\"389\" src=\"https:\/\/artica.capital\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/graf1.png\" alt=\"-\" class=\"wp-image-7418\" srcset=\"https:\/\/artica.capital\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/graf1.png 974w, https:\/\/artica.capital\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/graf1-300x134.png 300w, https:\/\/artica.capital\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/graf1-768x342.png 768w, https:\/\/artica.capital\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/graf1-18x8.png 18w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 886px) 100vw, 886px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p style=\"font-size:10px\">Source: Federal Reserve Bank and World Bank<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The prediction that integrating China into global trade would bring economic benefits to the West was borne out. The United States and many other countries outsourced much of their manufacturing to China and achieved significant improvements in living standards thanks to the falling cost of consumer goods.\nHowever, the prediction that China\u2019s economic development would make the country democratic and politically aligned with the West did not materialize.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>China continues to operate with a culture, political system, and economic dynamic that differ substantially from the models idealized by the West. Its worldview and development plans do not necessarily fit within the global order architected by Western powers and led by the United States. With a population of 1.4 billion and as the world\u2019s second largest economy, it is inevitable that the United States views China as a threat to its supremacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">A Paradigm Shift<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>After the end of the Soviet Union in 1991, we lived through an era of peace among the great powers, with most countries operating under diplomatic agreements defined by the Western bloc after the World Wars and under the general principle of cooperating toward global development and well-being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In democratic political regimes, and in the absence of imminent major geopolitical threats, governments\u2019 priorities came to be guided by their populations\u2019 desire for a better quality of life \u2014 strongly correlated with economic efficiency. We watched Germany, an enemy of Russia in both World Wars, increase its dependence on Russian gas to lower energy costs and pursue environmental goals. The United States warned of the geopolitical risks and applied diplomatic pressure on Germany to try to stop the move. Even so, economic logic prevailed. Populations prefer to reduce their cost of living rather than mitigate geopolitical risks, and what populations prefer generates more votes. This episode captures well the mindset of that era, in which economic optimization was the supreme objective of nations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Suddenly, national security became more important than economic efficiency. Germany stopped buying Russian gas \u2014 at least directly \u2014 to avoid generating profits for Russia and financing the war machine advancing toward the European Union. The United States banned the sale of advanced technologies to\nChina. American companies will earn less as a result, but they will no longer be contributing to the advancement of the country that threatens to become the new global leader.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Suddenly, national security began to outweigh economic efficiency as the dominant priority. Germany stopped purchasing Russian gas\u2014at least directly\u2014in order to avoid generating revenues for Russia and financing a war machine advancing toward the European Union. The United States, in turn, imposed restrictions on the sale of advanced technologies to China. American companies may earn less as a result, but they also reduce their contribution to the advancement of a country perceived as a potential new global leader.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This is not a shift confined to the strategies of politicians and diplomats. Ordinary people themselves have been growing aware of geopolitical conflicts and reacting accordingly. In one episode that took place shortly after the invasion of Ukraine, British port workers refused to unload Russian oil even without any legal obligation to do so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Prioritizing national security over economic interests may seem strange to current generations, but it is the mindset that has prevailed for most of human history. During the World Wars, a French citizen would never\nhave bought Nazi products simply because they were cheaper than the French equivalent. The last few decades were a period of exception \u2014 one that now appears to be coming to an end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What We Expect for the Future<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The pursuit of national security will inevitably lead each country to try to reduce its economic dependence on politically misaligned nations \u2014 either by nationalizing parts of its supply chain or by developing\nsuppliers in countries that pose no threat. This will likely reduce global trade flows and, as a result, produce lower economic growth and higher inflation, as production costs rise when economic efficiency is no longer the exclusive criterion guiding business decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>There is a tendency for the United States and China to seek to strengthen their spheres of influence over geographically closer countries, since geography is decisive in military matters. Projecting military power to distant regions is expensive and risky \u2014 it depends on complex logistical operations with more\nvulnerabilities than operations near one\u2019s own territory. This gives rise to the logic of not allowing a neighboring country to fall under the control of rival powers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The competition for influence, typical of cold wars, may bring opportunities for developing countries. One option is to maintain neutrality in order to preserve commercial relations with any nation offering favorable terms \u2014 as Switzerland did even during the World Wars. Another possibility is to discreetly auction one\u2019s loyalty, negotiating financial assistance, technology transfers, and military protection in exchange for political alignment, as many countries did during the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>There will also be an intensification of the technological race and investment in infrastructure necessary in the event of military conflict \u2014 a risk that is always present and has been growing more explicit. This race\nis independent of the stated intentions of each bloc. The weaker side fears the power of the stronger and seeks to develop itself to match it. As the weaker side advances, the stronger fears being overtaken and accelerates its own development to defend its leadership position. Thus, even if both sides have purely defensive intentions, there will be competition for economic and military power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The dynamics we are describing are far from new. Although they have not been part of our direct lived experience, history is full of episodes of this nature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Impact on investments<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Since these geopolitical conflicts can strongly impact the economy \u2014 broadly or concentrated in specific sectors \u2014 we must begin factoring them into our analysis of investment opportunities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Traditional fundamentals remain valid. We still want to invest in companies with competitive advantages and high profitability, but we have begun to assess whether a business is exposed to potential impacts from economic sanctions and\/or tariffs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The risk is most relevant for export-oriented companies. If a company\u2019s home country becomes the target of sanctions or tariffs, it may lose customers or be forced to reduce its prices to offset the new levies. In such situations, competitive advantages do not guarantee the protection of the business. In the case of total sanctions, a company may lose sales even if it is the sole producer of something with price-inelastic demand. For example, Nvidia is prohibited from selling its most advanced chips to China, as the American government decided to restrict access to cutting-edge technologies that could be used for military purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Companies focused on the domestic market tend to be more resilient. They may even benefit if a\nsignificant portion of their competition comes from imported products. If the country itself imposes sanctions or tariffs on other nations, competition diminishes and these companies tend to capitalize on the vacuum created in the local market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>There may also be indirect impacts across an entire country\u2019s economy if an important sector is affected. For example, if Brazilian agricultural exports were impacted, the entire country would suffer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Fortunately, Brazil is far from the center of current geopolitical conflicts, and the likelihood of being severely harmed by sanctions and tariffs is low. We are among the countries likely to benefit from the search for trading partners that pose no geopolitical threat. A recent example is the free trade agreement between the European Union and Mercosur \u2014 under negotiation for decades and now on the verge of entering into force \u2014 which only advanced due to the European Union\u2019s desire to reduce its dependence\non the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>At present, our portfolio has very low exposure to geopolitical risks. But in any case, we believe it is\nprudent to begin monitoring these global geopolitical developments and to exercise an extra degree of caution when evaluating opportunities in sectors that may be considered strategic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-group has-pureza-background-color has-background has-global-padding is-layout-constrained wp-container-core-group-is-layout-e696b4a4 wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\" style=\"margin-top:64px;padding-top:24px;padding-right:24px;padding-bottom:24px;padding-left:24px\">\n<p class=\"has-noite-color has-text-color has-link-color has-merriweather-font-family wp-elements-a94a22fefc05e0138fc731a3e7093fa3\" style=\"font-size:18px;font-style:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:0px;line-height:1.8\"><em>Check out the comments from Ivan Barboza, manager of \u00c1rtica Long Term FIA, on this month&#039;s letter in <a href=\"https:\/\/youtu.be\/BDrrbZWwMTU\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">YouTube<\/a> or not <a href=\"https:\/\/spotifycreators-web.app.link\/e\/jwmNOy3zb1b\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Spotify<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>When we read about history, each episode appears to have been clearly triggered by a notable event. The Second World War began on September 1, 1939, when Nazi Germany invaded Poland. The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union began on March 12, 1947, with the announcement of the Truman Doctrine. However, this clarity is largely the result of the didactic organization historians impose with the benefit of hindsight. The boundaries of historical episodes are far more blurred when experienced in the present.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":7421,"template":"","meta":[],"class_list":["post-7417","cartas","type-cartas","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/cartas\/7417","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/cartas"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/cartas"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7421"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/artica.capital\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7417"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}