It took just a few words from Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen on Wednesday to get investors to understand what we have been trying to say for the last couple of weeks – most of the recent major macroeconomic developments over the past few months should prove to be beneficial for the U.S. economy. Gradually rising interest rates are an inevitable, but manageable, side effect.

Exactly how many months must pass to satisfy the “considerable time” pledge Yellen made earlier this year with respect to when the Fed will allow interest rates to rise is debatable The general consensus seems to be perhaps as soon as the March/April timeframe, pending a continuation of strong employment and growing GDP.

That timeframe will probably sync well with oil prices, which historically tend to decline in winter and then gradually rise through spring into summer. Orchestrating those two traditional precursors of increasing inflation will be the tricky part; a spike in one may precipitate a jump in the other, which in turn may trigger a panicked exit from the stock market by jittery investors.

But the important lesson here is the triumph of fundamental economic strength over the distracting noise of geopolitical tensions. Yes, there is good reason to be nervous about what Vladimir Putin may do in the face of a plummeting oil prices and the collapse of the Russian ruble. Putin has proven many times that his “fight or flight” reaction of choice is to come out swinging with brass knuckles, so it stands to reason that he will not let OPEC undermine his economy without doing some sort of damage in exchange.

His problem is that the biggest future customer for Russian’s vast oil reserves is China, which has become an indirect beneficiary of increased American oil-producing capability. As the United States becomes increasingly energy-independent, it imports less oil from its petroleum-rich neighbors, who in turn have more oil to sell overseas to large consumers such as China and Japan – which also happen to be the same customers that OPEC will become increasingly dependent on in the decades to come.

By driving down the price of oil OPEC is effectively disrupting that supply chain, temporarily reversing the flow of oil exports away from Asia. They can’t keep it up forever, and they won’t because they don’t have to. Another 3-4 months of $60/barrel oil should sufficiently scale back production in North America and elsewhere to allow OPEC to assert its dominance in Asia for years to come.

The big winner in all of this is the United States, which has proven that it can decouple its economic fate from that of the rest of the world through a combination of aggressive monetary policy, a diverse industrial base, and increased energy-producing capacity. It has also become apparent that the U.S. does not need to engage in protectionist policies to defend its economic strength against hostile nations; it only needs to ensure that it maintains a market leading position in those sectors that are vulnerable to outside manipulation.

In other words, our dominance in technological innovation, energy production, and agriculture make it very difficult for the U.S. to become beholden to Russia, OPEC, or anyone else that might want to exert influence over our consumer behavior. Even the current artificial suppression of oil prices is actually good for the U.S. economy overall, and Yellen herself downplayed the degree of counterparty risk that may create in the banking sector.

Any responsible financial institution knows it must limit its risk exposure in the energy sector via a hedging strategy that protects the value of its collateral. When oil was closer to $100/barrel earlier this year most banks rolled over their oil hedges near $80/barrel, so anything less than that becomes the problem of an overly speculative hedge fund or energy trader. Although someone will end up losing a lot of money over this, it shouldn’t pose an existential threat to the recovering U.S. economy.

The other big winner this week was Cuba, which is finally on the road to normalizing diplomatic relations with the United States. While of little consequence to the U.S. economy (other than for cruise ship operators and cigar smokers), even a small trickle of dollars into the Cuban economy will help it immensely. Dropping the embargo altogether will prove trickier, but conventional wisdom is that the eventual passing of Fidel Castro would provide the opportune moment to let this anachronistic relic of the Cold War fall by the wayside.

Let’s just hope Putin doesn’t decide to put missiles in Cuba in the meantime.