February ended with a startling global development: the United States (US) and Israel engaged in coordinated joint attacks on Iran.

Nearly a week later, the conflict is sending shockwaves through the global oil supply chain. With the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, we in the Asian region will be among the first to feel the pain. Prices of petroleum products are rising and will likely skyrocket as the situation escalates.

Yes, Virginia, this is what the market fears—the “black swan” event. A black swan is an unpredictable, high-impact occurrence that seems inevitable only in hindsight. These rare events fall outside normal expectations, causing massive, often catastrophic consequences, much like the 2008 financial crisis and the 9/11 attacks.

The fallout will severely impact the outlook on inflation and interest rates. Both macroeconomic variables are expected to accelerate as the peso weakens against the mighty greenback.

“Overbought position” is the current buzzword echoing through banking alleys. This preference could further weaken the local currency as banks scramble to gobble up as much as they can.

From what I’ve gathered, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP)—acting through three financial institutions (one domestic and two foreign)—tried to quell the attack on the peso with an intervention estimated at nearly $2 billion.

Even this early, bank treasury officials expect the BSP to tighten monetary policy ahead of schedule to quash further speculative attacks, with the peso possibly flirting with the “senior mark” of ₱60. Depending on the depth of the depreciation, the market assumes a 25 to 50 basis point uptick in the overnight rate. The next BSP policy meeting is scheduled for April 23.

On the domestic political front, the premature announcement of the Vice President’s 2028 bid for the highest office is not helping; rather, it highlights the current fragility of the country’s political situation. Exacerbating this delicate condition are the impeachment proceedings against the VP, which have created divisiveness in the House of Representatives and amplified our political vulnerability.

I believe that public corruption investigations carry consequences far beyond the individuals involved. They shape trust in institutions and define how accountability is understood in a democracy. When allegations dominate headlines but evidence remains uncertain, the distinction between suspicion and proof becomes a matter of civic importance.

This brings me to the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee’s partial report on alleged flood-control irregularities potentially involving former Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez. After extended hearings—which I followed as closely as my favorite K-drama—the report offers an important clarification that risks being overlooked: the actual establishment of evidence.

The Committee has not recommended criminal or administrative charges against top officials. Its sole reference was a suggestion for a “case build-up” before the Office of the Ombudsman. In corruption investigations, wrongdoing ordinarily produces traceable indicators: documentation, financial movement, or corroborated testimony. I may be "off-beam" here, but I believe none were identified that pinned down the former Speaker.

The absence of corroboration following an extensive public inquiry is not merely inconclusive; it is informative. It indicates that the evidentiary basis required for attribution has simply not been demonstrated.

As the global conflict intensifies and domestic developments unfold, the scale of the collateral damage remains incalculable. What is evident, however, is that the domino effect will severely erode both domestic and global economic growth potential.