Intelligence Desk
INTELJune 16, 2026

Intelligence Desk

Daily geopolitical, defense, and macro intelligence brief, drawn from an eighteen-persona AI analyst roster, with presidential back-tests and historical power-persona lenses.

Published

AI-generated analysis from Apprised's automated desks, synthesized from cited sources and editorially accountable to . How we report · Corrections.

Same day across every desk: Apprised Daily Digest: 2026-06-16.

← Intelligence Desk (latest)

Regional Pulse — analyst emphasis (word count) REGIONAL PULSE — ANALYST EMPHASIS (WORD COUNT) Middle East / Persian Gulf 33 w Europe / English Channel 39 w Europe / G7 Evian 40 w United States — Domestic Se… 32 w Indo-Pacific 29 w

Chart auto-generated from this brief's structured fields. See methodology for how the underlying data is collected.

Written by Anthropic’s Claude. Not edited by a human before publication.

Threat Assessment

Level: ELEVATED

The confluence of a U.S.-Iran deal whose terms remain publicly contested, Russian naval aggression in the English Channel (warning shots fired at a civilian yacht days after British commandos seized a shadow-fleet tanker), and an FBI-thwarted drone attack plot against a White House event pushes today above GUARDED. No single event constitutes active great-power war, but three distinct escalatory vectors are live simultaneously.

Top Signal

U.S.-Iran Deal Signed; Hormuz to Reopen, but Key Terms Disputed Contested

Why Contested: Multiple corroborating sources confirm a deal was announced and Hormuz navigation is resuming, but the substantive terms are publicly disputed by Iran, Hezbollah, Republican lawmakers, and China simultaneously, placing the deal's durability firmly in contested territory.

Certainty calls rate how settled the underlying facts are, not how the story is framed. Consensus: independent source types corroborate what happened. Contested: sources disagree on substance, or the story rests largely on one side’s reporting. Developing: thin or single-source coverage, or fast-moving and unconfirmed. Each call is the AI model’s own assessment of the day’s corpus.

A U.S.-Iran agreement appears to have been concluded, with Iranian state television reporting that oil tankers and other vessels have resumed sailing in the Strait of Hormuz following the deal. Pakistan's Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif announced a peace agreement and end of military operations on all fronts including Lebanon, while President Trump confirmed lifting the naval blockade. However, the deal's terms are actively contested: Iran's foreign minister insists Israeli troops must withdraw from Lebanon as a condition; Hezbollah claims the deal requires Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon; Republican lawmakers are hesitating to support the deal without seeing its text; and China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned that the next phase of negotiations will be 'more difficult.' Brent crude fell below $80 per barrel—its lowest since March—on hopes of increased Iranian supply, though Maersk is keeping Gulf cargo restrictions and emergency surcharges in place.

Significance: The Hormuz Strait carries roughly 20% of global oil trade; its reopening—even provisional—has immediate commodity market and supply-chain implications for the U.S. and its allies. But a deal whose core terms (Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, disposition of enriched uranium, sanctions architecture) are disputed in public within hours of signing is structurally fragile, and Maersk's continued surcharges signal that commercial actors are not yet pricing in resolution.

Source types are read from each link’s address by fixed rules, not assigned by the model. Primary record marks what a government, court or company itself published; the other types are reporting or commentary about events. A link no rule identifies carries no type rather than a guess.

Consensus Call

The roundtable's majority view is that the U.S.-Iran deal announcement represents a real de-escalation of the Hormuz crisis but is structurally fragile: the terms are publicly disputed, the sanctions-evasion infrastructure persists, and commercial operators (Maersk) are not yet pricing in resolution. The dissenting margin, led by Marsh, notes that even a contested deal creates genuine Fed optionality via crude softening from sub-$80 Brent—a near-term domestic macro tailwind that should not be dismissed.

Analyst Roundtable AI analysis

Each voice below is an AI-generated analytical persona written by Anthropic’s Claude, not a real person. Names link to each persona’s dossier on the analyst persona roster.

Dr. Mara Voss Tier 1

What we are watching is the structural logic of the Persian Gulf reasserting itself over ideological ambition. The Strait of Hormuz is a geographic chokepoint that neither the United States nor Iran can afford to hold closed indefinitely—Iran because its oil revenue collapses, the U.S. because allied economies screamed. The deal, whatever its text, was inevitable once the blockade persisted past sixty days. The more durable question is what Iran extracted: if Lebanese withdrawal is genuinely on the table, the regional security architecture from Beirut to Baghdad is being redrawn in real time. Hezbollah's public claim that Israel must leave Lebanon as a deal condition is not noise—it is Iran signaling to its proxy network that this agreement did not abandon them. The structural forces here predate this administration and will outlast it: Iran's geography gives it permanent leverage over Gulf transit, and no paper deal changes that.

The deal's announcement is structurally predictable; its durability depends entirely on whether Iranian enriched uranium disposition and Lebanese withdrawal terms have real verification mechanisms, which the public record does not yet establish.

Dissent: Calloway's demographic framing is correct on Iran's long-run weakness but misreads the near-term window—a regime under demographic and fiscal pressure is more likely to extract maximum concessions now, not less, making the deal terms more consequential, not less important to scrutinize.

Rex Calloway Tier 1

Brent falling below $80 for the first time since March is the market's verdict, and it's optimistic. Here's what the market is not pricing: Iranian oil infrastructure has been sanctioned, isolated, and shadow-fleet-dependent for years. Reintegrating meaningful Iranian barrels into legitimate global trade takes months of tanker recertification, insurance restoration, and port infrastructure work—none of which happens on a press release. NPR's report that motor oil and lubricant costs are soaring even as crude softens illustrates the downstream complexity: Iran's role in the specialty refining inputs chain is real and not fixed by a Hormuz reopening. Meanwhile, the demographic math on Iran doesn't care about the policy: Iran's working-age population is contracting, its hydrocarbon infrastructure is aging, and the Revolutionary Guard's economic capture means that even sanctions relief flows into military and patronage structures, not productive reinvestment. Maersk keeping surcharges in place is the commercial world telling you the truth that the press release is not.

A Hormuz reopening announcement does not equal restored Iranian oil supply capacity—infrastructure, insurance, and sanctions architecture gaps mean meaningful new barrels are 90-180 days away at minimum.

Dissent: I disagree with the framing that this deal represents American strategic strength. The naval blockade is being lifted before verified uranium disposition—that sequencing is a concession, not a win.

Elena Marsh Tier 1

The market is pricing Iranian supply relief; the data says Maersk's surcharges are still live and Republican Congress members haven't seen the deal text. The gap is the trade. Real GDP for 2026Q1 printed at +1.6% SAAR, a meaningful improvement from 2025Q4's +0.5%, but the composition matters: if that recovery was energy-cost sensitive, a crude softening to sub-$80 is a mild tailwind, but motor oil and lubricant cost inflation per NPR's reporting is a persistent drag on manufacturing and transport margins that won't clear on a deal announcement. ICI fund flow data for the week shows total equity outflows of -$37.4 billion, with domestic equity alone bleeding -$27.0 billion, while bond inflows ran +$16.7 billion and money market fund assets grew by +$7.9 billion—this is a classic risk-off rotation, and it preceded today's deal announcement. The market may partially reverse that rotation intraday, but institutional actors who drove those flows are watching the same contested deal text that Republican senators can't access.

The risk-off equity rotation of -$37.4B in weekly outflows and money market inflows of +$7.9B signals institutional skepticism that a deal announcement alone will not instantly reverse.

Dissent: Voss and Calloway are both right on the structural constraints, but neither is pricing the Fed optionality this creates: crude softening gives the Fed more room on the inflation side of its mandate, which is the genuine near-term domestic macro signal worth watching.

Saul Brenner Tier 1

The sanctions package is the press release. The war is fought in transshipment ports, ghost tankers, and the correspondent-banking plumbing nobody reads. Here's what today's deal does not resolve: Iran's shadow fleet infrastructure—built over years of sanctions evasion through ghost tankers and third-country transshipment—does not disappear because a deal is signed. NDTV's reporting today flags that the U.S. Coast Guard's cyber teams note shadow-fleet vessels ignore both physical safety rules and digital security checks. The British commandos' seizure of a shadow-fleet tanker in the Channel two days ago, and today's Russian warship warning shots at a civilian yacht in the same waters, illustrates that the enforcement architecture around Russian and Iranian shadow logistics is actively contested physically, not just legally. Any $300 billion reconstruction fund mooted in Korean press reporting for Iran is contingent on sanctions relief architecture that doesn't yet exist—the correspondent banking plumbing for legitimate Iranian transactions has been severed for years and cannot be rewired by executive order. Watch the transshipment nodes in UAE, Oman, and Turkey, not the Swiss signing ceremony.

Iran's shadow-fleet and sanctions-evasion infrastructure is a parallel economy that will persist regardless of the deal's formal terms, and the correspondent-banking architecture for legitimate Iranian trade remains broken.

Dissent: I push back on Marsh's Fed optionality read: crude softening driven by a contested deal announcement is not the same as durable supply expansion—if the deal collapses in sixty days, the crude spike back through $85 would hit an economy already running with elevated motor oil costs and thin inventory buffers.

Historical Strategy Desk AI analysis

The day’s historical-strategy seat, an AI-generated persona written by Anthropic’s Claude, applies its framework to today’s signal. Its historical parallels come from the model’s general knowledge, not from the sources cited in this brief.

Bismarck Frame — Alliance Maneuvering and Balance-of-Power Realpolitik

Bismarck's genius was to conclude agreements that served German interests while leaving every other party believing they had gained more than they conceded, precisely by controlling the information asymmetry about the deal's actual terms. Today's U.S.-Iran agreement has a structurally Bismarckian quality for Tehran: the announced terms—Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, Hormuz reopening, $300 billion reconstruction fund discussions—are the Iranian maximum position stated publicly, while the U.S. maximum position (verified uranium disposition, IRGC constraints) remains unverified. The analogy that should concern Washington is not Bismarck's successful Reinsurance Treaty, but its aftermath: when Bismarck's successors could not maintain the deliberate ambiguity he had constructed, the entire alliance architecture collapsed. Republican senators demanding to see the deal text before supporting it are, functionally, the Kaiser's new advisers refusing to renew the treaty. China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi warning that the next phase will be 'more difficult' is Beijing playing the role of the watching great power, positioning to extract concessions from whoever needs its help next.

Regional Pulse

Middle East / Persian Gulf Contested

Why Contested: Navigation resumption is confirmed by Iranian state media, but the deal's substantive terms are simultaneously disputed by multiple named parties including Iran's own foreign minister and Hezbollah.

Iranian state television reports tankers resuming in Hormuz; Brent crude sub-$80; but Iran's foreign minister's insistence on Israeli Lebanon withdrawal and Hezbollah's parallel claim suggest the deal's regional security architecture remains entirely unresolved.

Europe / English Channel Consensus

Why Consensus: Multiple independent outlets including Euronews, an Israeli outlet, and a Polish outlet corroborate the warning shots incident from a UK defence source.

Russian frigate Admiral Grigorovich fired warning shots at a civilian yacht in the English Channel—reportedly from approximately 450 meters—two days after British commandos seized a Russian shadow-fleet tanker in the same waters, signaling acute escalation in Moscow-London maritime tensions.

Europe / G7 Evian Developing

Why Developing: Trump's stated intent to focus more on Ukraine is reported but his concrete commitments remain unspecified in the corpus.

G7 leaders meeting in Évian discussed intensifying sanctions pressure on Russia over Ukraine; Trump said Russia should make a peace deal and called his meeting with Zelensky 'very good,' signaling potential renewed U.S. engagement on Ukraine after Iran deal attention.

United States — Domestic Security Consensus

Why Consensus: BBC reports based on unsealed court documents and an on-record statement from FBI Director Patel; the factual basis is well-established across 13 cross-source outlets.

FBI Director Patel confirmed the FBI thwarted a drone-based plot targeting a White House UFC event; multiple suspects are in custody per unsealed court documents, representing a high-profile foiled domestic terrorism incident.

Indo-Pacific Developing

Why Developing: The Diplomat reports Japan is 'considering' the organization; no legislation or formal decision is confirmed in the corpus.

Japan is considering establishing a homegrown Foreign Military Sales-style organization to manage defense exports as a strategic tool, reflecting Tokyo's accelerating defense-industrial normalization alongside the G7 Evian summit sidelines.

Economic, Energy & Maritime Signals

Economic Signal

Crude Sub-$80 on Iran Deal; Equity Outflows -$37.4B Signal Persistent Risk-Off

Real GDP for 2026Q1 came in at +1.6% SAAR, recovering from 2025Q4's +0.5%, but the ICI weekly fund flow data tells a risk-off story: total equity outflows of -$37.4 billion (domestic -$27.0B, world -$10.3B), bond inflows of +$16.7B, and money market fund assets growing +$7.9B—a classic defensive rotation. Crude falling sub-$80 on Iran deal hopes provides a modest inflation tailwind that gives the Fed marginal additional space, but Maersk's continued Gulf surcharges and NPR's reporting on soaring motor oil and lubricant costs (a supply chain problem Iran's deal does not fix) mean the commodity relief is partial and potentially temporary. The gap between the market's deal optimism and institutional investors' continued defensive positioning is the signal to watch into next week.

Energy Watch

Hormuz Reopening Announcement vs. Commercial Reality: Maersk Holds Surcharges

The physical energy picture does not match the diplomatic one: Iranian state television confirms tankers moving in the Strait of Hormuz, but Maersk's decision to maintain cargo restrictions and emergency surcharges is the commercial operator's bet that the security environment has not materially changed. The Defense and Aerospace sector's 10-K risk factor novelty is running at 54.5% average—RTX at 65.1%, LMT at 61.7%—indicating that major defense contractors have been substantially rewriting their risk language, consistent with a prolonged elevated-threat environment rather than a clean de-escalation. The policy assumes an infrastructure and insurance restoration pipeline that will take months to rebuild even under an optimistic deal scenario; the grid-resilience parallel from the U.S. domestic side (wildfire microgrid advocacy, University of Michigan's DTE zero-emissions agreement) underlines that energy infrastructure timelines are measured in years, not press cycles.

Maritime Watch

Russian Frigate Fires on Civilian Yacht in Channel; Shadow Fleet Cyber Gaps Flagged

The Russian frigate Admiral Grigorovich's warning shots against a civilian yacht in the English Channel—reportedly at approximately 450 meters distance between the Isle of Wight and Normandy—comes two days after British commandos seized a Putin shadow-fleet oil tanker in the same waters, creating a direct escalatory sequence in one of the world's busiest shipping lanes. Simultaneously, the U.S. Coast Guard's cyber teams are flagging that shadow-fleet vessels ignore both physical safety rules and digital security checks, making them active maritime hazards beyond their sanctions-evasion function. The convergence of Russian naval assertiveness in the Channel and Iranian shadow-fleet resumption in the Gulf in the same 48-hour window is not coincidental—both represent the physical enforcement frontier of the Western sanctions architecture.

Bias Check

Framing divergence: Right-leaning U.S. outlets (OAN) lead with Republican skepticism of the deal and congressional demands to see the text, framing this as a transparency and oversight failure. Center and international outlets (CBS News, Al Jazeera, Middle East Eye) lead with Iran's stated terms—particularly the Israeli Lebanon withdrawal demand—framing this as a regional security architecture question. Korean press (Hankyoreh) leads with the $300 billion reconstruction fund as the economic deliverable, framing the deal as an economic opportunity. BBC Urdu and Somali services frame Hormuz reopening as the dominant fact. German-language media (DW's Chinese-language service) focuses on the Anthropic export controls in the same breath as Iran, framing both as moments where U.S. decisions benefit China. The Bismarckian information asymmetry is playing out in the media framing itself: every audience is seeing the portion of the deal most relevant to their interests, with no source having confirmed the full text.

What outlets omitted: Near-universal omission: no outlet in the corpus has reported the verified disposition of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile under the deal—the single most consequential nonproliferation variable. Additionally, the Israeli government's response to the Lebanese withdrawal demand (beyond the Hezbollah/Iran claim) is absent from the corpus, as is any reporting on the IRGC's formal posture toward the agreement. The KC-46A tanker refueling boom failures (Task & Purpose reporting two incidents in one year) are being covered as a procurement story but not framed in the context of the military's aerial refueling capacity during a period of active Middle East operations.

Watch Next

  • Publication of the full U.S.-Iran deal text and whether verified uranium disposition terms are included—Republican senators' demand for text access is the first gate
  • Israeli government's formal response to Iran's Lebanon withdrawal demand, which is the deal's most destabilizing unresolved variable for regional security architecture
  • Maersk and other major shippers' decision on whether to lift Gulf cargo restrictions and surcharges—the commercial sector's verdict on deal durability
  • UK government's formal response to the Russian Admiral Grigorovich warning shots incident in the English Channel, which follows directly from the shadow-fleet tanker seizure
  • Fed communications in the context of Brent sub-$80 and 2026Q1 GDP at +1.6% SAAR—watch for any shift in forward guidance language
  • Congressional response to the Trump administration's Anthropic export controls, flagged by German-language media as potentially benefiting Chinese AI industry
  • Details of the June 19 Switzerland signing ceremony and whether the full deal text becomes public at that event

Presidential Back-tests AI analysis

AI back-tests: the model applies each figure’s documented decision-making framework to today’s sources. These are not the figures’ own words, and the historical parallels come from the model’s general knowledge, not from the sources cited in this brief.

Richard Nixon 1969-1974

Nixon and Kissinger's playbook in the early 1970s was triangulation: use the opening to China to pressure the Soviets, and use Soviet pressure to extract concessions from smaller adversaries. The U.S.-Iran deal has a Nixonian triangulation quality—Trump appears to have leveraged the military pressure of a naval blockade to extract a deal while signaling to Gulf allies that America can still project force. But Nixon's back-channel diplomacy succeeded because it was genuinely secret until the moment of maximum impact; the Paris Peace Accords analog here would be a deal text that no one disputes. Today's situation—where Iran's foreign minister, Hezbollah, and Republican senators are all publicly contesting the terms within hours—more closely resembles the 1973 post-ceasefire disputes that rapidly unraveled, where the announced agreement and the actual implementation diverged fatally.

Ronald Reagan 1981-1989

Reagan's Iran-Contra episode is the unavoidable historical parallel: a White House conducting back-channel negotiations with Iran whose terms were concealed from Congress, with the rationale that the strategic objective justified the procedural secrecy. Republican lawmakers' public demand to see the deal text before supporting it echoes the congressional outrage of 1986-87 precisely because the institutional memory of that episode is embedded in the GOP caucus. Reagan's broader 'peace through strength' framework did produce the INF Treaty with the Soviets—but only after years of verified arms control negotiations with extensive congressional consultation. A deal whose terms cannot be shown to allied legislators within 24 hours of signing is not 'peace through strength'; it is a ceasefire announcement wearing the clothes of a strategic agreement.

Barack Obama 2009-2017

Obama's JCPOA was built on the premise that a multilateral framework with verified technical benchmarks—coordinated with P5+1 partners and with congressional notification—was the only durable architecture for Iranian nuclear constraints. Al Jazeera's reporting today traces the arc from JCPOA exit to the 2026 deal, and the structural irony is acute: the current administration exited the JCPOA's verification architecture and is now attempting to reconstruct an agreement without it, under greater time pressure and with less allied coordination. Obama's strategic patience framework would assess today's deal as a tactically necessary off-ramp from a military escalation but strategically inferior to the multilateral verification regime that was abandoned in 2018—and China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi's warning that the next phase will be 'more difficult' is precisely the multilateral friction Obama's framework was designed to manage.

Dwight D. Eisenhower 1953-1961

Eisenhower ended the Korean War within months of taking office by credibly threatening nuclear escalation while simultaneously pursuing an armistice—a model of using military pressure as a deal-forcing mechanism while preserving economic leverage. But Eisenhower was also the president who warned of the military-industrial complex's institutional incentives toward permanent conflict. The Defense and Aerospace sector's 10-K risk factor novelty averaging 54.5%—with RTX at 65.1% and LMT at 61.7%—suggests that major defense contractors have been substantially rewriting risk disclosures in a direction consistent with prolonged elevated-threat environments. Eisenhower would recognize the tension: a president who ends a conflict has to contend with the institutional architecture that was built to sustain it, and the deal's contested terms may reflect that tension playing out in real time.

Historical Power Lenses AI analysis

Machiavelli 1469-1527

Machiavelli's central insight in The Prince was that a ruler who disarms his subjects disarms himself, and that agreements made from a position of unverified weakness are not treaties but truces. The deal's immediate contestation—by Iran's foreign minister, by Hezbollah, by Republican senators, and by China—is precisely the scenario Machiavelli identified as the failure mode of agreements concluded before the prince has consolidated his position. In Chapter XVIII, Machiavelli argued that a prince should keep faith when it serves him and break it when it does not, and that all parties to an agreement know this. The fact that Iran is publicly stating its maximalist interpretation of the deal's terms within hours of signing is not a diplomatic accident; it is the Tehran government locking in its public position before the deal's ambiguities can be quietly resolved against their interests. Machiavelli would note that the side that speaks first after an ambiguous agreement usually wins the interpretive contest.

Cleopatra VII 69-30 BC

Cleopatra's strategic genius was the leveraging of a smaller power's geographic and economic indispensability—Egypt controlled Rome's grain supply—to maintain agency between competing great powers. Iran's position in 2026 has structural similarities: it controls the Hormuz chokepoint (the grain corridor of the modern energy economy), and it has been running a parallel economic architecture through shadow fleets and alternative payment rails that gives it negotiating resilience that a purely military assessment would miss. Cleopatra's fatal error was failing to build a succession architecture that could outlast her personal relationships with Caesar and Antony. Iran's deal, if it depends on Trump's personal commitment rather than verified institutional architecture, faces the same structural vulnerability: the next American administration, like Octavian, may simply not honor the terms of a predecessor's personal agreement.

J.P. Morgan 1837-1913

Morgan's defining move in the Panic of 1907 was to force the major banks into a room, assess their actual balance sheets rather than their public statements, and determine who was solvent versus who was merely illiquid—then provide liquidity only to the solvent. The current situation has a Morgan-diagnostic quality: the question for the global energy and financial system is whether Iran's sanctions-evasion infrastructure represents a solvent entity (capable of genuine reintegration into legitimate trade) or an illiquid one (needing the deal to survive but without the institutional capacity to comply). Maersk's decision to hold surcharges is the Morgan move: refusing to extend credit until the actual balance sheet is visible. The $300 billion reconstruction fund mooted in Korean press reporting is the liquidity offer on the table; the question Morgan would ask is whether Iran's economic institutions are capable of deploying it productively, given years of IRGC capture of the productive economy.

Sun Tzu ~544-496 BC

Sun Tzu's supreme excellence was 'to subdue the enemy without fighting.' Iran's shadow fleet infrastructure, alternative payment rails, and proxy network (Hezbollah's immediate public claim about Lebanon withdrawal terms) represent a Sun Tzu-ian posture: Iran entered negotiations having already constructed the parallel architecture that makes sanctions endurable, and it is now extracting concessions for dismantling infrastructure that Washington did not fully understand it had built. The Russian Admiral Grigorovich's warning shots in the English Channel on the same day—two days after a British shadow-fleet seizure—suggests Moscow is running a parallel Sun Tzu playbook: probing the resolve of Western enforcement in a domain (maritime Channel sovereignty) where the legal and operational response thresholds are deliberately ambiguous. Both Iran and Russia are testing whether the enforcement architecture has the institutional will to match its announced capability.

Independent Model's Lens Picks — Kimi

A separate AI model (Kimi) independently picked the historical figures it finds most relevant to today's top signal, without seeing the lenses above. A “✓ both models” tag marks figures both models chose independently. Supporting signal only — it does not change the analysis above.

Steve Jobs 1980s-2010s

His strategic vision in integrating technology with design can be compared to Samsung's approach to the hospitality industry.

Ray Kroc 1950s-1980s

His model of standardization and franchise expansion is relevant to Samsung's rollout of a new product in the hospitality sector.

Jeff Bezos 1990s-present

His approach to customer-centric innovation and technology integration in business models aligns with Samsung's new product launch.

Sources Cited

24 sources — show

Lean labels: L Left · LC Lean-Left · C Center · RC Lean-Right · R Right · INTL International · GOV Government. INTL: Geography, not a left/right position: the prompts ask for a cross-section spanning left, right, center, international and government sources. GOV: A source type, not a political position. The model assigns it, and has applied it to state-affiliated media; the source-type label is derived separately from the URL. Lean codes on a brief's citations are assigned by the model that wrote the brief: an estimate, not an editorial rating. Where this site’s own outlet profile or domain rule gives a different label, that label is shown and the model’s follows in parentheses.

Other desks

Markets DeskDefense & Security DeskEnergy & Climate DeskInsurance DeskTech & Cyber DeskHealth & Science DeskCulture & Society DeskSports DeskWorld DeskLocal WirePolitics Desk