Specialisation — risk analysis. Primary focus — macroeconomics and geoeconomics.
Research questions
Which macroeconomic factors drive market dynamics?
How do economic policy and geopolitical events affect assets?
How do changes in trade and energy flows feed through to prices?
Which dependencies make a market vulnerable to external changes?
Which conditions could change the current scenario?
Open-source intelligence (OSINT)
Official statistics, economic publications, registers, public reporting and sanctions lists.
The output is a situation assessment: which factors drive developments, how they affect markets and assets, which risks are supported by evidence, which are overstated and under what conditions the scenario could change.
01
Your project question
Task definition — what needs to be decided, what data is available and what is missing.
02
Source collection and verification
Source collection and assessment — source reliability and information credibility assessed separately; Admiralty Code ratings.
03
Hypothesis testing
Hypothesis testing — facts distinguished from assumptions and alternative explanations considered; ACH and competing hypotheses.
04
The client’s decision
Result — situation assessment, scenarios, implications for markets and assets, and limitations of conclusions.
Refining the task during analysis
02 / Methodology
From evidence to assessment.
Source reliability / Information credibility
Source reliability and the credibility of the information itself are assessed separately using Admiralty Code ratings. Each conclusion can be traced to a specific source and its assessment.
The source selection, tools and depth of analysis are specified in the contract for the particular task.
03 / RESEARCH EXPLORER
Follow the connections.
CROSSBEARING / GEO
Research nodes / illustrative connections
Select a direction to explore its research questions.
Scope of analysis
CPC, Druzhba and TITR (Middle Corridor). Trade and energy flows, capacity, tariffs, infrastructure and political constraints.
Research question
How do infrastructure constraints, tariffs and border procedures affect the redistribution of trade and energy flows?
Baku / Aktau / Turkmenbashi / Black Sea connections
Schematic research map. Lines illustrate connections to examine; they do not show live traffic, current threats or sanctions status.
04 / Deliverable
What you receive
Type: analytical brief.
Typically 5–15 pages, depending on the task.
01
Situation assessment — economic context, a chronology of events, key participants, dependencies and drivers of market change.
02
Key risks — an assessment of likelihood and consequences for the market or asset under consideration; overstated risks and risks receiving insufficient attention.
03
Scenarios — baseline, adverse and, where appropriate, positive, with conditions for materialisation and indicators to monitor.
04
Implications for markets and assets — potential consequences of each scenario and the factors on which they depend.
05
Limitations of conclusions — data gaps, material assumptions and conditions for revising the assessment.
Format — a document, presentation or question-and-answer session, as agreed.
I am developing Crossbearing as an independent analytical practice focused on macroeconomics and risk analysis.
I am interested in how economic policy, capital flows, geopolitical events and infrastructure constraints affect markets and assets. My research areas include energy, trade routes, sanctions and regional economic developments.
I work with open sources: comparing data, testing hypotheses and considering alternative scenarios. In my conclusions, I distinguish established facts from assumptions and identify missing data.
Crossbearing brings together my research, analytical materials and professional contacts.
Work is undertaken under a contract or an agreed request. The purpose, intended use of the result and terms of collaboration are clarified before analysis begins. Submitting an enquiry does not mean that a project has been accepted.
01
Initial enquiry
Introduce yourself and describe the question. Identify the prospective client and recipient of the result. A general description is sufficient initially; do not send confidential materials.
02
Purpose and use
We clarify the decision the analysis should inform, who will use the result and how: internal research, material for another recipient, publication or another agreed purpose.
03
Confirming feasibility
We assess the fit with the research focus, data availability, potential conflicts of interest and project constraints. Readiness to accept the task is then confirmed.
04
Agreeing the terms
We establish the scope, deliverable, deadlines, cost, payment arrangements, required materials and extent of clarifications. Material changes to the task are agreed separately.
05
Access and distribution
Recipients, transfer to third parties, publication, quotation and use of the Crossbearing name are agreed for each request. Permission to include excerpts in a portfolio is also discussed separately.
06
Analysis and delivery
We conduct the analysis, clarify material questions and deliver the result with sources, assumptions and limitations of conclusions. The format for discussing the result is agreed in advance.
07
Completion
Arrangements for corrections, subsequent updates, retention and deletion of supplied materials are defined by the agreed terms.
Methods and working materials
Delivery of the result does not include internal working materials, templates, software code, tool configurations or proprietary methodological developments. Their provision or permitted use requires a separate written agreement. General methods, sources, material assumptions and limitations of conclusions are disclosed to the extent needed to understand the result.
Scope and boundaries
Work is conducted within applicable law, including EU sanctions restrictions. Confidentiality and handling of supplied materials are governed by the contract. I reserve the right to decline a project before entering into a contract.
An analytical request, subcontracting, publication or commentary. Describe the question to be examined, the intended use of the result and any timing constraints.
CROSSBEARING / RESEARCH CAMPAIGN 01 / Initial situation brief
THE CASPIAN TRAP
Black Sea tanker attacks. Falling production in Kazakhstan. The infrastructure connecting events across the region.
July — August 2026Information cut-off · 09 AUG 2026Situation record · no final assessment
01 / An export route across borders
After February 2022, Europe’s energy imports began to change. Kazakhstan was an alternative crude supplier, but its export geography remained tied to existing infrastructure.
The Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) links western Kazakhstan’s producing areas to a marine terminal near Novorossiysk on Russia’s Black Sea coast. In its 19 July statement, CPC described a pipeline of 1,511 km carrying more than two-thirds of Kazakhstan’s crude exports. It reported approximately 70.5 million tonnes transported in 2025.
The export chain connected fields, pipeline capacity, storage, offshore loading and tanker access. The nearby Sheskharis terminal belongs to a different system. The map keeps it separate from CPC.
Kazakhstan also supplied Germany’s PCK Schwedt refinery through the northern Druzhba network. The research materials record approximately 2.1 million tonnes delivered in 2025 and 1.02 million tonnes in January–April 2026.
On 22 April, reports described a planned interruption to transit through Russia. Deliveries were suspended from 1 May. In July, Kazakhstan’s energy ministry said no Druzhba deliveries to Germany were scheduled for July or August.
The southern branch served a different set of destinations through Ukraine towards Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic. It belongs to the wider regional picture; it is not shown as the route used for Kazakh deliveries to Germany.
Developments involving Iran and the Persian Gulf formed a parallel part of the research record. The Strait of Hormuz connected the regional security picture with international energy shipments.
Reporting on maritime disruptions drew attention to alternative connections through Central Asia, the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea. The northern links between Iran and Russia entered the same geographic frame.
Their presence in one brief does not establish a common cause or coordination between separate incidents.
Author’s supplied chronology · provisional claims
04 / Four days at the Black Sea terminal
The chronology begins with reports of an attack on Nordic Zenith on 17 July. The tanker was scheduled to load at CPC.
On 19 July, CPC reported attacks on ASIA and NISSOS IOS during loading at its offshore moorings. The operator said loading had stopped and no spill had occurred.
On 20 July, CPC reported a further attack on NELSA while loading at SPM-1. A fire and crew evacuation were reported. Select each date to inspect the event record and its geographic reference.
Industry reporting then described lower oil and condensate production in Kazakhstan. The supplied chronology records an estimate of 1.63 million barrels per day on 22 July, approximately 21% below the comparison level used in that report.
A 27 July Reuters report, citing an industry source, put production on 26 July at about 1 million barrels per day, compared with a June average of 2.16 million. Reports also described reductions at Tengiz, Kashagan and Karachaganak.
These figures were estimates attributed to industry sources. They are not presented as independent operator confirmation. The geographical connection was the starting point: incidents on the Black Sea coast, reported production changes in Kazakhstan.
On 27 July, reports described the resumption of CPC intake and loading, including tankers SEAMAJESTY and MILOS. Activity also resumed at the separate Sheskharis terminal.
Further attacks were reported on 30 July. On 31 July, CPC operations were temporarily interrupted. Kazakhstan’s energy ministry subsequently said this did not mean an indefinite end to oil intake.
The supplied record puts intake on 1 August at approximately 100,000 tonnes per day. On 7 August, Reuters reported July CPC loadings more than 20% below plan, with exports around 1.2–1.3 million barrels per day. Early-August exports were estimated at 1.1–1.2 million. These figures describe different periods and must not be treated as directly interchangeable.
The source materials also contain reports of an incident in the Caspian Sea on 25 July. Ukrainian sources described a vessel allegedly carrying military cargo between Iran and Russia. Iran disputed that characterization and described a commercial vessel.
The materials record diplomatic statements on 26–28 July, a Turkmen foreign ministry response dated 27 July, and discussion in Iran of the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea.
This sequence is provisional. Original statements, the vessel’s identity and the legislative procedure remain unverified in the supplied record. The map shows regional ports and schematic connections, not an asserted incident site or a verified voyage.
Author’s supplied chronology · provisional claims
08 / The sequence that caught my attention
I first noticed reports of attacks on tankers near the CPC terminal. Soon afterwards, I saw reports of falling production in Kazakhstan.
That sequence caught my attention. The incidents occurred on Russia’s Black Sea coast, while reported effects extended to Kazakh producing fields and international energy companies. I began tracing the infrastructure that connected them.
The research expanded to Druzhba, Iran, the Caspian Sea, regional government statements and alternative corridors. I needed to keep operator statements, industry estimates, military claims and unconfirmed reports separate.
By 9 August, the initial observation had become a wider research record. This brief preserves its starting point. It does not present the final assessment.
09 / Evidence before assessment
The narrative records the situation and its chronology. The modules below separate collection, source verification, competing explanations, infrastructure dependencies and synthesis. Their status describes the public dataset, not a completed analytical finding.
Source record & geographic basis
Operator statements document the operator’s account. Industry estimates and statements by parties are attributed separately. The Caspian incident sequence remains provisional; no exact incident position is plotted.