Sanctions Environment: Recent addition of three Chinese O-RAN members to US Entity List has created tension , making new Chinese participation politically sensitive
Business Model Conflict: Open RAN fundamentally challenges Huawei's integrated, proprietary approach that has driven their market leadership
Alliance Direction: O-RAN Alliance has recently delisted Russian firms and shown concern about sanctioned entities
No Scores Yet
Relative Brier Score
0
Forecasts
0
Upvotes
Forecasting Calendar
| Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecasts | 0 | 0 | 18 | 18 | 18 |
| Comments | 0 | 0 | 18 | 18 | 18 |
| Questions Forecasted | 0 | 0 | 18 | 18 | 18 |
| Upvotes on Comments By This User | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Definitions | |||||
Star Commenter - Jul 2025
Why do you think you're right?
Why might you be wrong?
Potential Catalysts (Low Probability):
Unexpected geopolitical détente
Major regulatory changes requiring standards participation
Creative structural solutions through intermediaries
Why do you think you're right?
Why might you be wrong?
Key monitoring indicators: terrorist attacks in Kashmir, US diplomatic engagement levels, LoC incident frequency, and Pakistani military responses to Indian operations.
Why do you think you're right?
Key Protective Factors:
Recent successful diplomatic agreement implementation
Strong economic incentives ($118B bilateral trade)
Proven confidence-building mechanisms since 1990s
Nuclear deterrence effect
Why might you be wrong?
Key Risk Factors:
Local tactical incidents during resumed patrols
Miscommunication between field commanders
Spillover from India-Pakistan tensions or Taiwan crisis
Infrastructure construction disputes
Why do you think you're right?
The confluence of economic headwinds from tariff policies, historical seasonal patterns, and Trump's already-low approval trajectory creates strong negative pressure by August 1, 2025. The 32% probability reflects the significant but not overwhelming likelihood that approval remains below 45%
Why might you be wrong?
accounting for potential external shocks or policy reversals that could provide temporary boosts.
Why do you think you're right?
Bottom Line: 14% probability that US and Iran announce a new nuclear deal before August 1, 2025. While recent talks showed promise and Trump's pressure tactics created some openings, the military strikes in June severely damaged trust and hardened positions. The 26-day timeframe is insufficient for resolving complex technical issues around uranium enrichment, sanctions relief, and verification mechanisms that typically require months of detailed negotiations.
Why might you be wrong?
N/A
Why do you think you're right?
Key Factors:
Positive: Hamas submitted favorable response to 60-day ceasefire proposal; reduced operational capacity with IDF controlling 65% of territory
Negative: Previous ceasefire collapsed in March; regional tensions remain high; August historically sees increased violence
Why might you be wrong?
The forecast hinges primarily on whether ceasefire negotiations succeed by early August. Success would dramatically reduce incidents to the lower bins, while failure could push violence into the 751-1000 range or higher.
Why do you think you're right?
Based on comprehensive analysis of historical ACLED data showing August incidents of 596 (2020), 536 (2021), 622 (2022), 641 (2023), and 629 (2024) , combined with 2025 YTD elevated levels of 641-705 incidents per month , I forecast Mexico will experience political violence in the upper-middle range of historical patterns.
Why might you be wrong?
Critical Factors: 2024 established record violence levels with 201 political assassinations , and Sheinbaum administration changes showing increased state-criminal group clashes suggest continuation of elevated baseline. However, August historically trends slightly below yearly averages, and no major electoral triggers are scheduled.
Confidence Assessment: Moderate-high. Strong historical data foundation, but institutional transitions and cartel dynamics create meaningful uncertainty in timing and intensity of violence fluctuations.
Why do you think you're right?
Military Escalation (LR=2.8): CSIS satellite imagery shows Venezuela expanding military infrastructure at Ankoko Island and Punta Barima, with over 75 field tents supporting a battalion-sized unit and Iranian-built missile boats positioned within 40 miles of the Guyanese border
Naval Provocations (LR=3.2): On March 1, 2025, a Venezuelan navy warship approached ExxonMobil's Liza Destiny FPSO vessel approximately 200 kilometers southeast of disputed waters, representing a significant escalation into waters offshore of Georgetown
International Deterrence (LR=0.3): U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned that any military action against Guyana would result in a "very bad day" for Venezuela, with the U.S. expanding military cooperation and joint exercises
Legal Framework (LR=0.4): The ICJ on May 1, 2025, reaffirmed its order that Venezuela must refrain from conducting elections in disputed territory, though Venezuela rejected the court's authority
Most Likely Outcome (67% - None Occur): The combination of strong international deterrence, economic costs of war, and institutional constraints make major escalation unlikely in the 4-week window to August 1st.
Why might you be wrong?
This forecast reflects high uncertainty given the dynamic situation and short timeframe, with the next critical review scheduled for July 15, 2025, or upon any Bayes Factor ≥3 developments.