When politics cancels commerce

I was supposed to be in Miami on June 22.

The Italy–US Business, Investment, Science and Innovation Forum. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani opened the day, with dozens of Italian companies flying in, a B2B floor built for exactly the kind of deals this relationship is supposed to produce. Months of organizing. An Embassy science track. A cultural exhibition flown in from Italy.

Canceled. Days out.

The Forum didn't fall apart because the business case was weak. The companies were ready. The investment thesis was sound. The science was real.

It fell apart because Italy drew a line.

After President Trump publicly mocked Prime Minister Meloni, Foreign Minister Tajani called the remarks "grave and offensive" and canceled his US visit. His visit was the reason the entire Forum was built around. "Neither I nor Italy ever beg," Meloni said. This was not a scheduling conflict. It was a sovereign country deciding that dignity is a precondition for partnership, and that it would forgo a marquee economic event rather than be treated as a supplicant.

Sit with what that means for business.

One of America's most reliable European allies, led by a prime minister who was the only major European leader at Trump's second inauguration, chose to pull the plug on a months-in-the-making commercial forum over how it was spoken to. When respect erodes at the top, the commerce underneath it doesn't get a vote. The manufacturer who booked the flight, the founder who cleared the calendar, the trade office that spent six months building the room — all of it moves the moment the political relationship does.

This is the world in which business now operates. On both sides of the Atlantic, politics move fast, and they move first. A relationship that looks settled on Monday can be a diplomatic rupture by Friday. Political volatility is not background noise. It is the operating environment.

Three things for leaders to note:

1. Build political risk into commercial planning, not as what-ifs, but as a live variable that can erase an event, a deal, or a quarter on short notice.

2. Hold your relationships independent of the institutions that convene them. The Forum is postponed. The people I connected with through it are not going anywhere. That is the difference between depending on an event and building a network.

3. Communicate through the disruption, not around it. When the ground moves, silence reads as confusion. The leaders who come out ahead are the ones whose stakeholders never have to wonder where they stand.

The world you planned for is not always the world you have.

I still intend to be in that room when it reconvenes. The relationship between these two economies is bigger than any single date on a calendar — and the way to honor it is to insist, as Italy just did, that partnership runs both ways.

Enjoy the ride + Plan accordingly.

-Marc

*****

Marc A. Ross helps leaders understand the world and how to talk about it. Two decades at the intersection of commerce and government. He is the Founder of Caracal Global and Brigadoon. He works with leaders who cannot afford to be reactive in an environment defined by permanent disruption. DET, WAS, EDI, LON. marc@caracal.global | marc@brigadoon.live | +1 202 596 5270

*****

The Communicating Caracal Global | June 19, 2026

June 19, 2026 

Communications at the intersection of commerce and governments. Five issues, one win, one loss, and an MOU whose authors keep having to defend it.

The lead: Vance now owns a deal he cannot control, illustrating how premature messaging can undermine strategic authority and credibility.

The "Trump deal" with Iran went live this week, and within seventy-two hours, the vice president was on television scolding America's closest ally for criticizing it. JD Vance told Israeli cabinet members they need "to wake up and smell the reality," reminding them the United States is their "only powerful ally." That is not the language of a victory lap. It is the language of distraction and narrative shifting.

Here is the communications mechanics. When an outcome is announced before it is finalized, the announcer becomes its full-time defender, and every counterparty action becomes the announcer's problem to explain. Israel refuses to withdraw from Lebanon. The Iranian delegation skips Geneva. Vance cancels his trip to Switzerland, citing "logistical issues." Sixty days of negotiation now run on a clock that started with the principals not in the room, and the man who has to narrate the gap is the vice president, who has tied his own standing to a framework he does not control.

The lesson for senior leaders: Be careful what you put your name on before the ink is dry, as publicizing unfinished deals makes you inherit every delay and leak, testing your credibility.

A resignation by wire transfer

The FT reported this week that Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund has delivered only a fraction of what it pledged to several of its sports and tech ventures, and the same pattern shows up in the Anthropic story from the other direction: a government using the cadence of its actions, not its statements, to communicate intent. Slow-walked capital and Friday-evening letters are messages. Sophisticated stakeholders read the behavior, not the press release.

The principle is durable and cuts across every funded relationship: the funder's behavior outranks the funder's statements every time. When the wire transfers contradict the announcement, the wire transfers win, and everyone downstream starts hedging. If you are the institution making commitments, understand that your stakeholders are scoring your cadence as a forecast. The moment your behavior diverges from your messaging is the moment you have already changed your story, whether you meant to or not.

Washington became an AI shareholder, and nobody briefed the board

The Anthropic export fight, the Intel stake, and the sovereign-AI playbook now point in one direction: the US government is the gatekeeper to frontier models and most of the compute. The Commerce Department ordered Anthropic to deny foreign nationals access to its top models; the company complied by disabling them. Both the WSJ and FT editorial boards called the move dangerous and opaque. A bipartisan House group is demanding answers.

The takeaway from the communications is not about AI. It is about the speed at which a "commercial product" can be reclassified as a "controlled national-security asset," over a weekend, with no rulemaking and no comment period. For any leader whose business touches advanced computing, energy, biotech, or critical infrastructure, the Anthropic letter is a live drill. The question your board should be asking is not whether your product is safe today. It is whether your standing with the people holding the pen is strong enough to survive the letter when it arrives. Your regulatory exposure is no longer only what is written down. It is your relationship with the regulator. Build it before the crisis, because afterward is too late.

Burnham's "change is coming," and the discipline of a one-line message

Andy Burnham won Makerfield and now holds the 81 votes to force a Labour leadership contest. He ran an entire by-election on a message that was less a platform than a posture: he is not Keir Starmer. "Change is coming." That was the whole campaign, and it worked.

The lesson is about message discipline in a crowded field. Burnham did not try to be everything. He picked one contrast, owned it, and repeated it until the contrast became the choice. Starmer, by comparison, has spent the week being narrated by everyone else, furious with Ed Miliband, ghosted by his own cabinet, described by sources as "entrenched." When you do not control your own frame, your colleagues control it for you, usually less generously than you would. The leader with the simplest, most-repeated message wins the room, not because the message is the most sophisticated, but because it is the only one the audience can remember. If the UK ends the decade with seven prime ministers, every one of them will have been chosen in part on who held the cleaner sentence.

Smartbird and the price of a story

Allbirds, the wool-sneaker company, renamed itself Smartbird, sold its shoes for $39 million, pivoted to AI infrastructure, and watched its shares climb nearly 600%. It is the purest signal yet of the AI-narrative premium: the market will reward a story over a business model, at least until the story has to perform.

For communicators, this is a cautionary case, not a template. Narrative can move a stock faster than fundamentals can move a company, and that gap is the most dangerous place a leadership team can stand. A 600% move built on a renaming is a 600% expectation you now have to meet with an actual business you have not yet built. The discipline is to know whether your communications describe what you do or promise what you hope to do, because the audience will eventually audit the difference. Smartbird has bought itself attention. The bill for that attention comes due in the first quarter; the infrastructure story has to show infrastructure.

Win of the Week: Amazon

Amazon lets its product do the talking. Quietly, over a year, it built Trainium into a chip serious enough that it is now in talks to sell to outside data centers, the first real crack in Nvidia's pricing power. No grand reframe, no narrative premium, just a sold-out third generation and strong demand for a fourth. The communications win is the restraint: Amazon said little and let "sold out" be the entire message. In a week when Smartbird showed what it looks like to sell the story before the substance, Amazon showed the opposite, and the opposite is more durable.

Loss of the Week: FIFA and Fox

Fox holds the US English-language World Cup rights and spent the week publicly complaining that ESPN is not covering the tournament enough, after a historic 4-1 US win drew nearly 25 million viewers. Airing your grievance about a rival's coverage is an admission that you cannot generate the attention yourself. The job of a rights holder is to make the event unmissable; outsourcing blame to a competitor's newsroom signals to the market that the property is not carrying itself. When your communications strategy is "why isn't someone else promoting our thing," you have already lost the narrative you paid billions to own.

Enjoy the ride + plan accordingly.

— Marc

Marc A. Ross | Founder + Chief Communications Strategist @ Caracal Global

Caracal Global helps leaders understand the world and how to talk about it. The Communicating Caracal Global is published on Fridays — a weekly memo on the communications stakes inside the week's business, political, and global news: who shaped the narrative, who lost it, and what leaders should take from both. Washington DC | Detroit | London  | caracal.global | marc@caracal.global

Cool is a mindset, not something you can copy

Back in 2007, two people who actually knew something about the subject sat down to write about cool. 

Noah Kerner, a marketing maverick. Gene Pressman, the man who ran Barneys New York for more than twenty-seven years and brought Armani, Versace, Prada, and Manolo Blahnik to American shoppers. The book was Chasing Cool.

Nearly two decades later, it remains one of the useful business books I return to, as it refuses to give you the formula for cool.

Here is the line that opens the book: " Cool is not a state of mind, a celebrity fad, or an American obsession. Cool is a business.

That distinction matters more now than it did when the book was published. In boardrooms across America, the chase is the same as it ever was. Kerner and Pressman describe product managers staring at vodka bottles and candy bars, tissue boxes and hamburgers, asking the only question that seems to matter: how do we make this thing cool? How do we make this gadget the iPhone of our industry? How do we do what Ralph Lauren did? How do we get what Hermes gets?

These questions are wrong, and the book spends pages explaining why.

The frantic search for the secret formula isn't the answer. Pressman and Kerner call it looking for the killer app, and they note that the more people believe a shortcut to cool exists, the more frantically companies chase one. The result is predictable. They end up looking in someone else's kitchen, copying a recipe that seems to work for another company, and failing miserably for theirs

Here is what the authors found after interviewing more than 70 of the most respected innovators of their era, from Tom Ford to Russell Simmons to Ian Schrager: the brands that endure do not rely on a gimmick. Ralph Lauren and Hermes are not relevant because of a viral campaign or a dash of bling. They are relevant because the leaders behind them took substantial risks, committed to a mindset, accepted the real possibility of failure, and in doing so opened the door to real success.

That is the uncomfortable part. Cool cannot exist without first acknowledging and navigating risk. You cannot focus-group your way to it. You cannot benchmark it from a competitor. You cannot buy it with a media budget. It is the visible result of an organization willing to operate without a net or a playbook, moving point-to-point like Teddy Roosevelt in the woods.

Three things this means for leaders:

First, relevance beats heat. Kerner and Pressman draw a hard line between what is hot and what is relevant. Hot is a moment. Relevant is a position. Focusing on relevance encourages leaders to think beyond fleeting trends and aim for sustained influence, inspiring confidence in their strategic choices.

Second, authenticity is not a tagline; it is a constraint. Pressman, careful never to hand readers a recipe, still names the essential ingredients: authenticity, passion, spontaneity, and a willingness to take risks. Notice that none of these can be delegated to an agency. They are organizational properties. They describe how a company actually behaves, not what its marketing claims. The audience can tell the difference.

Third, the shortcut is the trap. Every time a leadership team asks how to replicate another brand's cool, they reveal that they have stopped doing the harder work of building their own. Consider In-N-Out. A company that refuses to advertise, rarely courts the press, and runs a deliberately small menu, and still posts per-store sales that rival McDonald's because it built something coherent and let that coherence do the selling.

The way leaders communicate should be a strategic approach, shaping how audiences understand decisions before, during, and after they are made, reinforcing the importance of authentic, coherent messaging

Chasing Cool is, underneath the fashion and the celebrity interviews, a book about exactly that. The brands that endure are the ones that communicated a coherent worldview through every risk they took, until the market understood them before they had to explain themselves. That is not luck. That strategy looks cool from the outside.

Stop chasing cool. Build something worth copying, and let your competitors do the chasing.

Enjoy the ride + Plan accordingly.

-Marc

*****

Marc A. Ross helps leaders understand the world and how to talk about it. Two decades at the intersection of commerce and government.

He is the Founder of Caracal Global and Brigadoon.

He works with leaders who cannot afford to be reactive in an environment defined by permanent disruption.

Operating in DET, WAS, EDI + LON.

marc@caracal.global | marc@brigadoon.live | +1 202 596 5270

*****