South Asia: More of a meow than a roar

In the bubble years of the late 1980s, the appreciation of the Japanese yen sent a flood of investment from corporate Japan to the fast-growing economies of Southeast Asia. That was before the rise of China as a manufacturing powerhouse in the 1990s. But today, the optimism accompanying China's ascent has waned ‑ China is more likely to compete with ASEAN economies than support them.

According to Nikkei Asia, such diverse national circumstances suggest that, sadly, Southeast Asia remains less than the sum of its parts -- its once-promising Tiger economies have mostly lost their roar.

Nowhere is this reversal in ASEAN's economic fortunes more apparent than in Thailand, where auto sales have collapsed. Indonesia, which has vast natural and mineral resources, should also be doing better than it is.

While Vietnam is struggling in finding enough workers, not all of Southeast Asia has lost its "Tiger" dynamism.

Laos sells hydropower to its neighbors at a time when cheap power is an increasingly valuable competitive advantage.

Malaysia has benefited from its proximity to Singapore.

Trump policy rattles European allies

Vice President Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Friday made separate speeches that rattled European leaders. US officials said Europeans cannot expect American troops to be on the continent forever.

Speaking at a press conference in Warsaw, Poland, Hegseth said that US force levels in Europe are important but must be scrutinized.

"What happens five, 10, 15 years from now is part of a larger discussion that reflects the threat level, America’s posture, our needs around the globe, but most importantly the capability of European countries to step up," he said.

"That’s why our message is so stark to our European allies — now is the time to invest because you can’t make an assumption that America’s presence will last forever."

His comments come on the end of a week-long trip through Europe that included stops in Germany to visit US Africa Command and Brussels for a two-day meeting of NATO defense ministers. While at the alliance headquarters, he hinted that Europeans would have to step up conventional deterrence against Russia.

Hegseth also sparked fears as to whether the US would largely abandon investment in NATO moving forward after he expressed “that stark strategic realities prevent the United States of America from being primarily focused on the security of Europe.”

No decision has yet been made on changing US force presence in Europe, though the Trump administration has said it is reviewing where it puts troops globally.

Vance, meanwhile, in remarks at the Munich Security Conference, argued the biggest threats facing Europe were not China or Russia, but the issue of mass migration and laws that restrict free speech.

“While the Trump administration is very concerned with European security and believes we can come to a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine … the threat that I worry the most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor,” Vance said.

“And what I worry about is the threat from within,” he continued. “The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America.”

Vance’s remarks did not delve into the conflict in Ukraine, where the Trump administration is pushing for a ceasefire negotiation, nor did he discuss at length President Trump’s desire for Europe to commit more to defense spending.

Instead, Vance accused European officials of using laws meant to minimize misinformation and disinformation to marginalize populist voices and voters, which garnered a tepid reception in the room. 

 

Can Trump impose tariffs on Chinese drugs?

According to The Hill, President Trump’s tariffs on China are in place and hitting all products imported from the country — including a number of pharmaceuticals that Americans rely upon.

Chinese imports account for a significant proportion of US prescriptions and over the counter drugs. Many of the Chinese-produced medicines are generics, which account for 91 percent of prescriptions dispensed in the United States.

“The Chinese market is a key supplier for key starting materials and Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) to the generic supply chain,” said John Murphy, president and CEO of the Association for Accessible Medicines (AAM). 

“I will say they’re sort of less important any longer for the actual finished fill and final manufacturing,” Murphy noted. “But really, it’s the rare minerals, the key starting materials which are obviously critical to the supply chain.” 

Stakeholders were hopeful that medications would be spared from tariffs. Some noted that the US is a signatory to the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) 1994 Agreement on Trade in Pharmaceutical Products which calls for the elimination of tariffs on many pharmaceutical products. China has vowed to sue over the 10 percent tariffs, which it says are in violation of WTO rules. 

But a White House official said no exceptions are planned, and the administration will not be recognizing the WTO agreement. 

The country’s dependence on China to maintain pharmaceutical supply chains has long been an issue that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have sought to address.

In 2018, the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission noted that the country was “heavily dependent” on drugs and API originating from China.

A 2023 analysis from the Atlantic Council found that the value of Chinese-imported APIs has continued to grow in recent years. 

According to Monica de Bolle, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the US isn’t unique in its dependence on China for drugs, noting that the European Union is similarly reliant.   

De Bolle said China’s dominance in the market grew as it sought to enhance its drug producing capacity while US pharmaceutical companies turned to other manufacturing pursuits. 

“What happened is that we developed this huge biotech sector where we have a lot of stuff going on,” said de Bolle. “The manufacturing market just turned to producing these more sophisticated drugs; the stuff that’s used in treatments, the stuff that’s going through clinical trials.” 

“That’s why we went from, you know, producing a lot of these things to not producing many of these things and buying them from elsewhere. And elsewhere eventually became China,” she added. 

The margins for manufacturing generic drugs are razor-thin, and any disruptions to the supply chain are apt to cause shortages or delays. 

“That additional 10 percent tariff is going to have a fairly significant impact on the cost of goods for the generic and by a similar supply chain,” said Murphy. “We don’t hold massive stockpiles of generic drugs in the United States. It’s a fairly just-in-time inventory.” 

According to Murphy, some manufacturers may find it economically unviable to produce generic drugs, resulting in shortages. 

Across all industries, analysts have warned that increased costs brought on by tariffs will be passed to consumers. But some manufacturers may instead drop out of the market entirely rather than pass on costs, partly due to a key provision in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

As part of its cost-cutting measures, the IRA included a provision that requires drug makers to pay Medicaid a rebate if the price of their drugs rises faster than the rate of inflation.  

Tom Kraus, vice president of government relations at the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, said incurring that penalty on top of tariffs could mean more than just shortages. 

“You’ve got to sort of factor in paying that penalty, which is going to make you less profitable or you’re going to have to drop out of the market,” said Kraus. 

He noted that group purchasing organizations, companies that help hospitals and pharmacies buy drugs and save money, may decide that manufacturers whose products originate from China are too expensive and turn away from them entirely. 

 

 

Pakistan on a path of implosion

It was what one may safely describe as a ‘memorable’ occasion. Exactly a year ago today, adult-aged Pakistanis from all faiths, cultures, ethnicities, and socioeconomic classes had headed to their assigned polling stations to cast their ballots in a much-delayed general election.

 was remarkable how many expectations they ended up defying that day. One recalls the unannounced blackout of all mobile communication services, enforced by the authorities shortly before polls opened, which had left people without access to vital election-related information and unable to contact their friends and families.

It was not enough to deter the over 59 million citizens’ intent on having their voices heard that day. One also recalls the smug predictions of television pundits and the surveys fed to the media in the run-up to Election Day. None of them prepared the nation for the coup ordinary Pakistanis pulled off merely with the help of a stamp and a ballot paper.

No observer can honestly deny that the last election’s results were highly unexpected.

Considerable effort was made to keep one party out of the race. The party’s leadership was jailed, its workers picked up, its electoral symbol withdrawn, and its candidates, even after being forced to declare themselves independents, not allowed to campaign.

If the previous elections were manipulated — perhaps by the same elements — to bring the PTI to power, they went out of their way to ensure that it did not have any chance this time around.

Despite all their machinations, however, the PTI ended up winning an unexpectedly large chunk of the popular vote.

The results announced two things: one, that Pakistan’s youth had finally arrived on the political scene, and two, that ordinary voters had overwhelmingly rejected the narratives set by the powers of the day. In this sense, the 2024 election was indeed a historic one.

Much went wrong after February 08, 2024, mainly because responsible individuals within the Pakistani state refused to come to terms with the country’s changed realities.

However, though the injustices that followed the last general election cannot be forgotten, it is equally important to start thinking about what must now be done to mitigate their effects.

The country has continued to march on a path of implosion, unable to contain the dissonance created by a conflict between what those controlling the state want and what the people want for themselves. Unless this fundamental conflict is resolved, the country will not be at peace with itself.

A war of egos has been fought between a handfuls of individuals at the cost of the well-being of millions of ordinary Pakistanis. This unnecessary war must be called to an end. The people of Pakistan have been wronged for too long. They need a change.

Dawn Editorial, February 08, 2025

Aman-25 focuses regional cooperation

The picturesque seafront of the Pakistan Navy Dockyard with windsurfers, sailboats and Navy boats painted a beautiful backdrop for the flagpoles from which fluttered the flags of 60 nations participating in the ninth Multinational Maritime Exercise ‘Aman-25’ on Friday morning.

The biennial exercise commenced with a formal flag-hoisting ceremony, followed by the cutting of a cake by senior representatives of the participating navies.

A message from the Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Naveed Ashraf, was read by Commodore Omar Farooq during the ceremony.

The naval chief welcomed the participants and highlighted that the exercise, which began in 2007, has now become a regular biennial feature, bringing together regional and ex­tra-regional navies to foster a secure and conducive maritime environment.

He emphasized the Pakistan Navy’s role as a key stakeholder in the Arabian Sea and its initiatives to enhance regional maritime security, including Regional Maritime Security Patrols.

He further stated that in recognition of the international community’s trust in its efforts to promote peace and stability at sea, Pakistan Navy has introduced the Aman Dialogue this year as an adjunct to the exercise.

Speaking on the occasion, Pakistan Fleet Commander Rear Admiral Abdul Munib underscored the force’s contributions to collaborative maritime security and the exercise’s significance in enhancing interoperability among the participants.

Rear Admiral Munib praised the participating countries for supporting Pakistan’s commitment to peace and maritime security and expressed the hope that the friendships fostered during the exercise would continue and grow.

The ninth edition of the exercise will see the participation of 12 naval ships, some of which have already arrived at the Karachi port while others are on their way.

China, with its Plans Baotou-133 and Plans Gaoyouhu, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, with its HMS Jazan and HMS Hail ships, are the nations participating with two vessels each.

The other vessels include UAE’s Abu Dhabi (CVT) P-191, Malaysia’s KD Terengganu-174, Japan’s JS Murasame, Sri Lanka’s SLNS Vijayabahu, Indonesia’s KRI Bung Tomo-357, Iran’s Jamaran, Bangladesh’s BNS Somdura Joy, USA’s Lewis B. Puller and Oman’s RNOV Sadh. Meanwhile, Turkiye is participating with one aircraft.

There are also a number of special operation forces and observers taking part in the inaugural Aman Dialogue scheduled for February 09 to 10.

Bangladesh’s Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Nazmul Hassan, who arrived with his naval fleet, held meetings with Pakistan’s top military leadership on Friday in another sign of the improved bilateral ties between the two nations.

Admiral Hassan, who will also attend the inaugural Aman Dialogue on maritime security, called on the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Gen Sahir Shamshad Mirza and Chief of Army Staff Gen Asim Munir.

He also held a bilateral meeting with Admiral Ashraf at the Naval Headquarters in Islamabad.

The meetings focused on the evolving regional security landscape and mutual strategic interests, particularly in maritime collaboration.

Both militaries explored avenues to strengthen defence ties, including joint naval exercises, training programs, and exchange visits.

Adm Hassan’s visit marks the second high-level engagement between the Bangladeshi Armed Forces and Pakistani military leadership in recent months.

On January 14, Lt Gen S.M. Kamrul Hassan, the principal staff officer of Bangladesh’s Armed Forces Division, led a military delegation to Pakistan, where both sides agreed to bolster defence cooperation and collaborate on regional peace efforts.

Observers see these developments as a shift in Bangladesh-Pakistan relations after years of estrangement.

Bangladesh’s participation in Pakistan’s multilateral naval exercise is considered a major step forward in military cooperation.

 

New tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China

According to Saudi Gazette, US President Donald Trump will impose new tariffs on imports from Mexico, Canada, and China starting Saturday, marking a significant escalation in global trade tensions.

The tariffs will include a 25% duty on Mexican and Canadian imports and a 10% tariff on Chinese goods.

However, Trump stated on Friday that Canadian oil would face a reduced tariff of 10%, set to take effect on February 18.

Trump also signaled potential future tariffs on the European Union, accusing the bloc of unfair treatment toward the United States.

"These are promises made and promises kept by the President," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, justifying the Mexico and Canada tariffs as a response to what she described as their role in the distribution of illegal fentanyl in the United States.

The president has frequently cited undocumented migration and trade imbalances with neighboring countries as key reasons for the tariffs.

During his campaign, Trump had threatened to impose tariffs of up to 60% on Chinese goods but has so far held off on immediate action, instead directing his administration to conduct further analysis.

US imports from China have remained flat since 2018, following a series of tariffs imposed during Trump’s first term.

However, concerns are mounting that renewed trade restrictions could trigger a wider trade conflict and drive up costs for American consumers.

In response to the tariffs, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau warned that Canada would retaliate if the US moves forward with the new levies.

"It's not what we want, but if he moves forward, we will also act," Trudeau said.

Both Canada and Mexico have indicated they will implement countermeasures while also working to reassure Washington that they are addressing US border concerns.

Chinese officials have also urged against protectionist measures, with Vice Premier Ding Xuexiang calling for a "win-win" approach to trade during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos. While he did not mention the US by name, his comments underscored China's concerns about a renewed trade war under Trump's presidency.

The new tariffs come as the US relies heavily on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, which together accounted for 40% of all goods brought into the country last year. If tariffs on Canadian and Mexican oil imports are enforced, they could undermine Trump’s promise to lower the cost of living, potentially raising prices on fuel and consumer goods.

Trump acknowledged on Friday that tariffs could lead to short-term economic disruption, as costs are often passed along to businesses and consumers. 

Trump can’t take Panama Canal on his own

Teddy Roosevelt once declared the Panama Canal “one of the feats to which the people of this republic will look back with the highest pride.” More than a century later, Donald Trump is threatening to take back the waterway for the same republic.

The president-elect is decrying increased fees Panama has imposed to use the waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. He says if things don’t change after he takes office next month, “We will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America, in full, quickly and without question.”

Trump has long threatened allies with punitive action in hopes of winning concessions. But experts in both countries are clear, unless he goes to war with Panama, Trump can’t reassert control over a canal the US agreed to cede in the 1970s.

What is the canal?

It is a man-made waterway that uses a series of locks and reservoirs over 51 miles (82 kilometers) to cut through the middle of Panama and connect the Atlantic and Pacific. It spares ships having to go an additional roughly 7,000 miles (more than 11,000 kilometers) to sail around Cape Horn at South America’s southern tip.

The US International Trade Administration says the canal saves American business interests “considerable time and fuel costs” and enables faster delivery of goods, which is “particularly significant for time sensitive cargoes, perishable goods, and industries with just-in-time supply chains.”

Who built it?

An effort to establish a canal through Panama led by Ferdinand de Lesseps, who built Egypt’s Suez Canal, began in 1880 but progressed little over nine years before going bankrupt.

Malaria, yellow fever and other tropical diseases devastated a workforce already struggling with especially dangerous terrain and harsh working conditions in the jungle, eventually costing more than 20,000 lives, by some estimates.

Panama was then a province of Colombia, which refused to ratify a subsequent 1901 treaty licensing US interests to build the canal. Roosevelt responded by dispatching US warships to Panama’s Atlantic and Pacific coasts. The US also prewrote a constitution that would be ready after Panamanian independence, giving American forces “the right to intervene in any part of Panama, to re-establish public peace and constitutional order.”

In part because Colombian troops were unable to traverse harsh jungles, Panama declared an effectively bloodless independence within hours in November 1903. It soon signed a treaty allowing a US-led team to begin construction.

Some 5,600 workers died later during the US-led construction project, according to one study.

Why doesn’t the US control the canal anymore?

The waterway opened in 1914, but almost immediately some Panamanians began questioning the validity of US control, leading to what became known in the country as the “generational struggle” to take it over.

The US abrogated its right to intervene in Panama in the 1930s. By the 1970s, with its administrative costs sharply increasing, Washington spent years negotiating with Panama to cede control of the waterway.

The Carter administration worked with the government of Omar Torrijos. The two sides eventually decided that their best chance for ratification was to submit two treaties to the US Senate, the “Permanent Neutrality Treaty” and the “Panama Canal Treaty.”

The first, which continues in perpetuity, gives the US the right to act to ensure the canal remains open and secure. The second stated that the US would turn over the canal to Panama on December 31, 1999, and was terminated then.

Both were signed in 1977 and ratified the following year. The agreements held even after 1989, when President George H.W. Bush invaded Panama to remove Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega.

In the late 1970s, as the handover treaties were being discussed and ratified, polls found that about half of Americans opposed the decision to cede canal control to Panama. However, by the time ownership actually changed in 1999, public opinion had shifted, with about half of Americans in favor.

What’s happened since then?

Administration of the canal has been more efficient under Panama than during the US era, with traffic increasing 17% between fiscal years 1999 and 2004. Panama’s voters approved a 2006 referendum authorizing a major expansion of the canal to accommodate larger modern cargo ships. The expansion took until 2016 and cost more than US$5.2 billion.

Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino said in a video Sunday, “Every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to.” He added that, while his country’s people are divided on some key issues, when it comes to our canal, and our sovereignty, we will all unite under our Panamanian flag.

Shipping prices have increased because of droughts last year affecting the canal locks, forcing Panama to drastically cut shipping traffic through the canal and raise rates to use it. Though the rains have mostly returned, Panama says future fee increases might be necessary as it undertakes improvements to accommodate modern shipping needs.

Mulino said fees to use the canal are “not set on a whim.”

Jorge Luis Quijano, who served as the waterway’s administrator from 2014 to 2019, said all canal users are subject to the same fees, though they vary by ship size and other factors.

“I can accept that the canal’s customers may complain about any price increase,” Quijano said. “But that does not give them reason to consider taking it back.”

Why has Trump raised this?

The president-elect says the US is getting “ripped off” and “I’m not going to stand for it.”

“It was given to Panama and to the people of Panama, but it has provisions — you’ve got to treat us fairly. And they haven’t treated us fairly,” Trump said of the 1977 treaty that he said “foolishly” gave the canal away.

The neutrality treaty does give the US the right to act if the canal’s operation is threatened due to military conflict — but not to reassert control.

“There’s no clause of any kind in the neutrality agreement that allows for the taking back of the canal,” Quijano said. “Legally, there’s no way, under normal circumstances, to recover territory that was used previously.”

Trump, meanwhile, hasn’t said how he might make good on his threat.

“There’s very little wiggle room, absent a second US invasion of Panama, to retake control of the Panama Canal in practical terms,” said Benjamin Gedan, director of the Latin America Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.

Gedan said Trump’s stance is especially baffling given that Mulino is a pro-business conservative who has “made lots of other overtures to show that he would prefer a special relationship with the United States.” He also noted that Panama in recent years has moved closer to China, meaning the US has strategic reasons to keep its relationship with the Central American nation friendly.

Panama is also a US partner on stopping illegal immigration from South America — perhaps Trump’s biggest policy priority.

“If you’re going to pick a fight with Panama on an issue,” Gedan said, “you could not find a worse one than the canal.”

Courtesy: Associated Press

How would WTO brace Donald Trump?

The World Trade Organization (WTO) held the last of its 2024 meetings this week, and for anyone rooting for the institution to conclude long-discussed agreements just ahead of its 30th anniversary, the results were a little hard to watch. Here’s a recap of what came out of gatherings of the WTO’s General Council and its Dispute Settlement Body.

Here’s a recap of what came out of gatherings of the WTO’s General Council and its Dispute Settlement Body:

·        Dispute settlement reform was unresolved and there was a pledge to continue talking next year

·        On the second fisheries agreement, India and Indonesia were granted more time to air their concerns. “Fish 2” was at the decision stage but was demoted to a “discussion” item

·        India, South Africa and Turkey blocked a deal known as Investment Facilitation for Development. That left it short of the needed consensus, even though 126 members backed its incorporation into WTO bylaws

·        Progress was made on two administrative issues: picking dates for the next ministerial conference (March 26-29, 2026, in Cameroon) and approval of WTO Secretariat pension reforms

Newly re-appointed Director General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala tried to maintain a positive outlook, saying she hopes members return in the new year with a “spirit of compromise, ready to do deals.”

For an organization that needs everyone to agree, that’s going to be a challenge when US President-elect Donald Trump takes office January 20, 2025. His threatened tariffs and “America First” trade agenda run counter to the mission of the Geneva based WTO.

Trump promised 60% duties on Chinese imports and at least 10% for the rest of the world. In November, he threatened to impose further 10% tariffs on Beijing and 25% on Mexico and Canada if they fail to stop the flow of fentanyl and undocumented migrants to the US.

All of that violates the commitments that more than 160 nations make to join the WTO, said Bill Reinsch, a Commerce Department official during the Clinton administration and now a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Trump is known to dislike multilateral institutions, having withdrawn the US from a trade deal for the Indo-Pacific, the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Health Organization in his first term.

He could quit the WTO, too. Or he could stay in it, heap more scorn on the rules-based international order and ignore other countries complaining about Washington’s protectionism.

In Trump’s first term, US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer watched the WTO’s appellate body grind to a standstill by preventing the appointment of new judges as terms expired, leaving it short of the number needed to function.

This week Biden administration delegates blocked a move by 130 WTO member countries that called for a restart of the process to fill vacancies on the appellate body — the 82nd time that that proposal failed.

The outlook for the WTO to free itself of paralysis under the incoming Trump administration isn’t favorable. 

Jamieson Greer, Trump’s nominee for USTR, was a close adviser to Lighthizer. His views on WTO relevancy are unclear, but he did say in testimony in May that “efforts to hold China accountable under WTO dispute mechanisms were largely unfruitful.”

The WTO also irked some Trump allies by accelerating the process this year of approving Okonjo-Iweala for another four-year term at its helm.

That was “almost certainly designed to prevent the incoming Trump administration from having a say in the matter,” said Dennis Shea, Trump’s ambassador to the WTO in his first term.

“The WTO already has diminished reputation in the United States,” he said. “This unprecedented action only diminishes it further.”

According to a Geneva-based trade source, Trump’s name wasn’t mentioned during this week’s General Council session.

Courtesy: Bloomberg

JCPOA no longer relevant, says IAEA chief

Rafael Grossi, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has said that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is no longer viable, appearing to place sole responsibility for the 2015 nuclear deal's lame-duck state on Iran.

"The philosophy of the initial JCPOA agreement can be used as a basis, but the agreement itself is no longer necessary," Grossi remarked during his visit to Italy for discussions with the Foreign Ministry. 

The UN nuclear chief pointed out that Iran is now enriching uranium to levels of 60%, a threshold that he said brings the country close to the capability to produce military-grade uranium, which requires enrichment to 90%. "Iran is rapidly approaching the status of a nuclear state," he claimed. 

Grossi omitted any mention of the West's abandonment of the deal, the factor that prompted Iran to curtail some of its JCPOA commitments in the first place. 

The JCPOA was signed in 2015 between Iran and the P5+1 group of countries (the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and China). It aimed to limit Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the termination of sanctions.

Washington unilaterally withdrew from the pact in 2018 and re-imposed sanctions against Iran. European signatories to the deal not only failed to take the sting out of US sanctions but also came up with anti-Iran bans of their own. 

Tehran began to scale back on some of its JCPOA commitments in 2020, under a new law passed by the Iranian parliament. 
 

 

 

Iran-China railway link via Afghanistan

The head of the Islamic Republic of Iran Railways (RAI), in a meeting with the head of Afghanistan Railway, said the country is eyeing to connect its railway network to China via Afghanistan.

“Due to the proximity of Iran, Afghanistan, and China, this route (Iran-Afghanistan-China) is the only route that can shorten the transit route and reduce the costs, therefore completing the Herat rail route based on the schedule is very important,” Jabar-Ali Zakeri said in the meeting with Mohammad Ishaq Sahibzadeh.

In this meeting, Zakari stated that Iran is determined to support the development of Afghanistan's railways, noting that the existence of a railway line in the northwest of Afghanistan and the proximity to the common border with Iran is a great opportunity for transit between the two countries.

Referring to the training courses held for Afghan railway employees in the past years, the RAI head emphasized, “According to Afghanistan's request, soon the third training course for Afghan railway employees will be held.”

According to Zakeri, many of the problems faced by the Iran-Afghanistan Railway Consortium have been resolved and, currently, three trains a week are running on the designated route between the two countries.

Further in this meeting, Sahibzadeh also pointed to the growing cooperation between the railways of Iran and Afghanistan, while appreciating the training programs for 96 employees of Afghanistan Railways by Iran Railways.

“Due to the successful holding of the first and second courses, we are now waiting for the third course,” he said.

Sahibzadeh stated that the Khaf-Herat railway project depicts the friendship between the two countries, adding, “We hope that with cooperation, we will see an increase in transit, and as a result, the growth and promotion of trade between the two countries.”

 

Trade in Southeast Asia under Trump

Southeast Asia appears vulnerable to Donald Trump's threat of universal tariffs and a renewed trade war with China. Five of the region's six largest economies run trade surpluses with the United States. According to Nikkei Asia, all is not lost for Southeast Asia. Exports and economic growth would take a hit in the short term, but the region can reap rewards from trade diversion and substitution and might even take a tougher stance against Chinese firms' anticompetitive practices.

Geopolitically neutral, the area saw an increase in gross trade with both China and the US between 2017 and 2020 during the first Trump presidency. Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand won big as companies from China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the US relocated from China or duplicated their manufacturing bases in Southeast Asia to avoid US tariffs. 

Here's what you need to know: 

What is Trump's tariff threat?

The objective of Trump's stated trade policy is to return manufacturing jobs to the US and disentangle its supply chains from China. Trump and his advisers view China's trade advantage as unfairly derived from currency manipulation, intellectual property theft and forced technology transfers. 

During his first term, Trump used executive powers to impose tariffs of up to 25% on US$250 billion worth of electronics, machinery and consumer goods imports from China. Beijing retaliated with similar measures against US agricultural, automotive and technology exports. 

Now, Trump has proposed a 60% duty on all Chinese goods entering the US and tariffs of up to 20% on imports from everywhere else. That would be done with a mix of executive and legislative tools.

How bad could it be for Southeast Asia? 

Nearly 40% of Cambodian exports go to US, the largest exposure in ASEAN, in terms of proportion of total exports, followed by Vietnam at 27.4% and Thailand at 17%, according to Oxford Economics, putting all three at particular risk. Thanavath Phonvichai, president of the University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, said Thailand's economy might take a 160.5 billion baht ($4.6 billion) hit if Trump follows through on his promises.

Vietnam has the fourth-largest trade surplus in the world with the US The imbalance grew rapidly as Chinese, Taiwanese and South Korean firms used Vietnam to bypass Trump-era tariffs. Vietnam's fortunes could just as quickly turn, especially if the US continues to classify it as a "nonmarket economy," which tends to entail higher tariffs. 

Uncertainty about Trump's tariffs could prompt firms to pause or stop investment plans in Southeast Asia. US companies accounted for about half of the US$9.5 billion in fixed asset investments in Singapore last year, according to the city-state's Economic Development Board. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong was quick to remind Trump in a congratulatory letter that the US has maintained "a consistent trade surplus" with Singapore. 

Any blow to the Chinese economy will spill over to ASEAN countries that depend on Chinese consumption, export demand and tourism. Weaker appetite for Chinese goods will affect Southeast Asian suppliers of inputs to Chinese producers. Indonesia, Southeast Asia's largest economy, would suffer most because of its 24.2% export exposure to China, mainly of commodities.

Chinese exporters unable to send their wares to the US might divert them to Southeast Asia, where governments have fielded complaints from local producers hurt by dumping of metals, textiles and consumer goods. 

What is the upside for Southeast Asia? 

Southeast Asia's current manufacturing boom began because of the trade war. Analysts expect that, in time, trade substitution and diversion will outweigh the hit to growth. 

"We think an even greater pushback on China could drive more supply chain diversion, with Chinese businesses trading and investing more within Asia," said Jayden Vantarakis, head of ASEAN research at Macquarie Capital. 

The electric vehicle factories that some Southeast Asian governments aggressively courted could provide an economic buffer. "There is also EV demand growing outside the US, so I think there may actually be a net benefit to Indonesia. What will happen is that smaller countries that are trying to become carbon neutral, especially since petrol prices are increasingly expensive, will try to take over the supply and buy more electric cars," said Sumit Agarwal, professor at the National University of Singapore Business School. 

Trump's promised tariffs may provide ASEAN governments with the impetus to impose antidumping tariffs on Chinese goods, as Thailand did with rolled steel this year. Tighter US rules of origin could also give governments an opportunity to ensure that more high-value parts production and assembly are done locally. 

What will happen to Southeast Asian currencies and markets?

Trump's tariffs may ease the pressure on Southeast Asian central banks to further loosen monetary policy.

"Essentially, Trump's victory is inflationary for the world due to his planned tariffs, so the global monetary normalization or easing cycle likely won't be as sharp as previously thought, including in the Philippines," said Miguel Chanco, chief emerging Asia economist at Britain-based Pantheon Macroeconomics. 

Chanco told Nikkei Asia that Southeast Asian currencies will not strengthen as previously expected, due in part to the markets re-pricing the pace of easing by the US Federal Reserve and therefore continuing dollar strength. 

Among the six major Southeast Asian economies, the Thai baht and Malaysian ringgit have been the worst performers since Trump's victory, declining 3.2% and 2.9%, respectively, against the US dollar through Wednesday. 

Thai securities house InnovestX recommended stocks that will benefit from the strong dollar and weak baht. These include companies with significant export revenue like CP Foods and Delta Electronics, or which are involved in tourism, such as Airports of Thailand, property developers and hoteliers. 

How should Southeast Asian economies prepare? 

Governments are already taking steps to reduce their overreliance on either the US or China by deepening relationships with other countries and regions, and stressing their neutrality.

The Philippines sees its trade agreements with the likes of South Korea as a buffer against US shocks. "We want to see many more of these ... bilateral and multilateral agreements, so that we can open up many more opportunities," said National Economic and Development Authority Secretary Arsenio Balisacan. 

Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has suggested, governments could do more to support local companies investing in the US and other diversified manufacturing bases, as Japan did in 2020 with a US$2 billion program known as the "China exit subsidy." 

That support could include reducing operating and logistics costs, providing trade risk insurance and removing barriers to trade. Amending relevant laws to allow transshipment at Laem Chabang port, Thailand's main export channel, would be an invaluable boost to Thai exporters, said Kongrit Chantrik, executive director of the Thai National Shippers' Council. 

Southeast Asian economies should also focus on building resilience by strengthening intra-ASEAN trade, according to Jaideep Singh, analyst at the Institute of Strategic & International Studies, Malaysia.

"There should be efforts to promote economic integration through reduced non-tariff measures, improved trade facilitation and better coordination of regional value chains," he said.

Similarly, countries like Vietnam could "win brownie points" from Trump by buying aircraft engines or liquefied natural gas from the US, according to VinaCapital chief economist Michael Kokalari. 

But he added that fears are "hyperbolic" about trade under Trump, who visited Vietnam twice in his first term. There are no "significant reservations from American consumers to purchase 'made in Vietnam' products," he wrote. On the contrary, the US cannot re-shore everything, so "Vietnam may be viewed as helpful in [weaning] the US off of low-end China-made goods."

 

World to face oil surplus in 2025

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Global oil supply will exceed demand in 2025 even if OPEC Plus cuts remain in place, as rising production from the United States and other outside producers outpaces sluggish demand.

The prospect of a more than one million barrels per day (bpd) excess supply - equal to over 1% of world output - is a headwind for OPEC Plus, which comprises the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and allies such as Russia - in its plan to start raising output

Oil demand growth has been weaker than expected this year in large part because of China. After driving rises in oil consumption for years, economic challenges and a shift towards electric vehicles are tempering oil growth prospects in the world's second largest consumer.

"China's marked slowdown has been the main drag on demand," the IEA said in its monthly oil market report.

"Rapid deployment of clean energy technologies is also increasingly displacing oil in transport and power generation, adding downward pressure to otherwise weak demand drivers," the report added.

The Paris-based agency left its 2025 oil demand growth forecast little changed at 990,000 bpd. At the same time, it expects non-OPEC Plus nations to boost supply by 1.5 million bpd, driven by the United States, Canada, Guyana and Argentina - more than the rate of demand growth.

Next year's surplus, as forecast by the IEA, could make it harder for OPEC Plus to bring back production. Earlier this month, OPEC plus again postponed a plan to start easing output cuts amid falling prices.

"Our current balances suggest that even if the OPEC Plus cuts remain in place, global supply exceeds demand by more than one million bpd next year," the IEA said.

Oil prices traded slightly weaker after the report was released, with Brent crude trading below US$73 a barrel.

 

 

 

 

 

China lauds progress in Iran-Saudi ties

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has expressed strong support for the constructive interactions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, emphasizing their role in fostering enduring good neighborly relations.

During a press briefing, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian noted that Saudi-Iran relations have been on a positive trajectory and China appreciates this progress. 

Lin Jian stated that Saudi Arabia and Iran have been engaging in positive interactions at various levels, further solidifying their reconciliation and playing a crucial role in fostering regional peace and stability. 

China remains committed to supporting both nations as they advance together, enhancing mutual trust, and achieving enduring good-neighborly relations and friendship, the spokesman said. 

The remarks come after several high-ranking visits between Iran and Saudi Arabia took place in the past month. 

Iran and Saudi Arabia restored diplomatic ties in March of 2023 under a China-brokered deal. The two West Asian countries have agreed to move towards establishing a security cooperation pact.

 

United States fails in keeping oil prices high

No sooner had OPEC Plus depressed market sentiment by admitting a potential rollover of its cuts into 2025, Iran reemerged as the main talking point of the markets.

Having downplayed the Israeli retaliatory strike, the oil markets are now anticipating an Iranian attack on Israel, using a large number of drones from Iraqi territory.

A semblance of geopolitical risk premium has lifted ICE Brent futures ahead of a particularly jittery week when the United States votes for its president.

OPEC Plus postponed its planned increase of oil production, bringing back the 2.2 million barrel per day output under eight countries’ voluntary cuts, citing concerns about soft oil demand, particularly on the heels of China’s slowing down, as well as rising non-OPEC supply.

In an attempt to retain its share in gas market, the US Treasury announced new sanctions imposed on Novatek’s Arctic LNG 2 liquefaction terminal, Russia’s latest LNG project in the Arctic, targeting construction service provider Smart Solutions and four LNG tankers run by newly created UAE firms.

European majors flock into US gas, Norway’s state oil firm Equinor boosted its portfolio of non-operated US shale assets after it bought EQT’s gas interests in the northern Marcellus basin for US$1.25 billion, taking its stake to 40.7% as most of the assets are still operated by Expand Energy.

In an attempt to diversify its energy supplying countries, China’s top driller locked in Key Iraqi Deal. China’s top upstream firm CNOOC signed an exploration and production contract with Iraq to develop the onshore Block 7, with the state-owned firm holding 100% interest over a massive territory covering more than 6,000 km2 in Diwaniyah province.

Bangladesh: Performance of interim government

Nearly three months have passed that the interim government (IG) has been in charge of a country devastated beyond comprehension. We the mere mortals, struggling to forget the nightmarish 15 years, can be forgiven for nurturing very high expectations from the new dispensation.

It will do us well to remember that the IG is not the caretaker government (CTG) of the past. It is very unique, given the circumstances in which it came to power—a popular youth-led uprising has validated not only the IG’s assumption of power but has also, ipso facto, granted approval for any and all legal actions it undertakes to rectify the damage to the nation’s institutions and agencies. The mutilation done to the nation would require more than run of the mill actions or traditional approach.

In passing it should be stressed that raising the issue of Hasina’s resignation at this point in time is out of place, some may see this as being ulteriorly motivated, and reeking of conspiracy.

It is of no consequence whether a person who assumed power in a dubious manner, was deposed through a popular uprising—there can be no greater mandate than this—and sought exile of their own volition, has tendered an official letter of resignation. We must admit that the president’s recent remarks regarding this have mystified us.

The various reform committee gives us a good idea of the sectoral reforms the IG wants to undertake. Unique situation requires unique response that may not necessarily conform to the normal methods and means of administering a country.

But while the IG goes about fixing things, it should keep the people informed about its policies and plan of action for rectification. The IG should keep in mind that although it is not bound by any timeframe and its framework of reference is very wide, its time limit is also not open-ended. And a “reasonable” timeframe is open to various interpretations. What the IG is doing should also be visible.

The first thing that still needs to be fully addressed is the administration, which seems to be influenced by the lingering presence of the Awami League. Reportedly, many beneficiaries of the past regime continue in important appointments. The longer they stay in the administration the more are the risks they pose to the successful implementation of the IG’s reform plans. The significance of the manufactured unrest in the RMG sector, sabotage of oil tankers, and various demands from different professional groups are well-orchestrated actions to nip the plans of the IG in the bud.

Apparently, it would seem that the administration is not moving fast enough for some quarter’s liking, and a feature post-revolution is the regime of intimidation and coercion imposed on certain quarters. While that is understandable under the circumstances, making haste while sorting out the muck of the last 15 years may be counterproductive.

The public has certain expectations as well as grievances, and some of these are manifested in the student outburst, demonstrated in their siege of the High Court for removal of judges appointed during the Hasina regime where personal fealty triumphed over qualification and merit. The latest outburst is against the person in Bangabhaban for reasons mentioned.

One of the gripes the students have, and justifiably so, is the continuation of some senior bureaucrats who thrived under the Hasina regime, and who were complicit in the destruction of the state institutions and misuse of the state agencies for partisan gains. This goes for all sectors.

The education sector was a target of the students too. But witch-hunting is not the answer. Admittedly, the public universities were caderised from the vice chancellor down to the junior most lecturer. Most of them did not meet the minimum requirements of the post. One might say that it was a long-term plan to destroy the backbone of the nation by destroying the education sector.

It would also seem that the process of accountability is not moving fast enough. One hears the question “Where have all the crooks gone, and how?” Indeed, one may ask, once again, where have all the crooks gone? And by crooks, I mean all those that sought sanctuary inside the safety of the cantonments across the country after the student-led revolution that has been anointed with the very appropriate appellation of Monsoon Revolution, and many others who made good their escape quite a few days after the assumption of office of the IG. In fact, there is a general suspicion that the beneficiaries of the previous government may still be calling the shots.

A passing reference was made to this subject in one of my previous columns, but time has come to accord the issue more than a cursory glance. It is my distinct impression that the matter has been deliberately swept under the carpet hoping that, Bangalee memory being short, the matter would be forgotten. Well, not so soon.

A few questions need to be answered by the relevant individuals in positions of responsibility. Feigning ignorance will not sit well with the common man, who feels that allowing those responsible for bringing so much misery to the people—through wanton loot and plunder, siphoning billions out of the country, and particularly those directly responsible for the deaths of a thousand and the maiming of several times more—soils the blood of the martyrs. They must be held accountable.

Of the 170 million Bangladeshis, only 600 or so sought refuge inside the military establishments. Among them were politicians and senior members of the law enforcing agencies. The question is why. They must have done something wrong that they feared would incur public wrath. In fact, these were the people who would have left the country sooner but somehow couldn’t. Some of their cleverer and smarter colleagues had abandoned the Awami League boat no sooner than they realized that it had started taking in water.

In fact, abandoning the followers and leaving the country furtively for safer places during hard times has been the hallmark of the party leadership. History will bear out my comments. Therefore, to see the leader living up to the party tradition after August 05 was not a surprise.

My question is, in the future, will highly secured places within the country be used as sanctuaries for those responsible for killing democracy, looting public wealth, and committing the kinds of misdeeds that those seeking protection in the cantonments are alleged to have committed? Additionally, we are still at a loss to explain how many of these individuals managed to leave the country and who guaranteed them a safe exit.

The ultimate goal is to hold a participatory all-inclusive and acceptable election. Having said that, holding elections without fixing the systemic aberrations would take us back to square one. That would denigrate the sacrifice of the martyrs of the Monsoon Revolution. And it shall not be allowed to happen.

 Courtesy: Daily Star

China cuts key mortgage rate

According to South China Morning Post, China announced on Monday it had slashed a key reference rate for mortgage loans by a quarter of a percentage point, as the country stepped up efforts to stabilize the property market.

The benchmark five-year loan prime rate (LPR) was lowered to 3.6% from 3.85%, while the one-year lending rate was also cut to 3.1% from 3.35%.

For Chinese households with mortgage loans of 1 million yuan (US$140,000), the monthly instalment payment would be reduced by around 141.5 yuan (US$19.9) after the cut to the five-year LPR.

The move was expected as central bank governor Pan Gongsheng had said at a financial forum on Friday that lending rates would decrease by between 20 to 25 basis points.

The rates were last cut in July.

“The rate cut is broadly in line with market expectations,” said Zhang Zhiwei, president and chief economist at Pinpoint Asset Management.

“It is an encouraging sign that the monetary policy is moving in the right direction to fight deflation.”

The move came as Beijing has taken an all-out effort to drive up the struggling property market.

Speaking at a press conference on Thursday, the housing ministry said it would double the credit to white list property projects to 4 trillion yuan by the end of the year and renovate 1 million units in urban villages.

“The monetary policy has clearly shifted to a more supportive stance since the press conference on September 24. The real interest rate in China is too high,” Zhang added.

Analysts expected more rate cuts in the coming quarters, after Pan indicated on Friday plans to further cut the reserve requirement ratio – the amount of cash that commercial banks must hold as reserve – for banks.

“But this is unlikely to boost loan demand much,” said Huang Zichun, an economist at Capital Economics, who noted weak credit demand as the main constraint.

“And without a rebound in inflation, which we don’t foresee, real lending rates will remain restrictive unless policy rates are cut by a lot more.

“The heavy lifting will need to come from fiscal policy.”

 

Who will be the next prime minister of Japan?

With nine candidates, Japan's ruling party holds its most crowded leadership race ever on September 27, 2024. Among those running for Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) president are two women. Many of the candidates have served as defense and foreign ministers as well as in other senior government and party positions. The winner will be rubber-stamped as Japanese prime minister when parliament reconvenes in early October.

A million local LDP supporters, representing less than 1% of the Japanese population, will have the same say as the LDP's 368 party legislators in the initial round of voting. But as no candidate is expected to secure a majority at that stage, the vote of the legislators will then gain much more weight in a runoff between the two frontrunners.

While the LDP sees the leadership race as a way to choose the face of the party ahead of an expected general election in coming weeks, other parties are not just standing by. The main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party has scheduled its own leadership election on September 23. In addition, LDP coalition partner Komeito recently changed its leader for the first time in 15 years.

Five of the LDP's six intraparty factions, which played an influential role in previous presidential elections, have decided to dissolve in the wake of a political funding scandal that came to light late last year. With factional control thus weakened, it has become easier for candidates to enter the leadership contest. The winner will succeed Fumio Kishida and be appointed Japan's 102nd prime minister at the Diet, where the party holds the most seats in both the upper and lower houses.

The result of the vote could bring a generational change. At 43, former environment minister Shinjiro Koizumi is a prominent candidate. As well as being the son of Junichiro Koizumi, one of Japan's best-known prime ministers internationally, Koizumi would become the country's youngest prime minister since the 19th century.

Japan could also have its first woman prime minister, with two female members of Kishida's cabinet standing, including Economic Security Minister Sanae Takaichi.

Former LDP Secretary-General Shigeru Ishiba is making fifth try for the top job, receives a lot of backing from local LDP supporters. 

Former defense minister Shigeru Ishiba ranked the best choice to lead the party, overtaking Shinjiro Koizumi in a recent opinion poll conducted after the nine candidates were confirmed. Hawkish Economic Security Minister Sanae Takaichi, who sees herself as an heir to former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, ranked third among all survey respondents.

Sanae Takaichi is the most popular choice among stock market pros to become Japan's next leader, according to a monthly survey. Takaichi led the poll with 29% of responses, as market participants were hopeful the lawmaker would pursue economic policies similar to "Abenomics" -- those of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. 

Former Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba proposed US military bases in Okinawa prefecture be managed jointly with Japanese forces, saying so in a public forum among all candidates. The security discussion comes as China ramps up military pressure on Taiwan and expands its maritime presence in the East and South China seas.

 Courtesy: Nikkei Asia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sri Lankan go to crucial poll today

Sri Lankans are going to the polls to elect a president today (Saturday), at a time when the country is struggling to emerge from the worst economic crisis it has faced since gaining independence in 1948.

Sri Lankans have suffered a turbulent few years. Fed up with severe shortages of essentials such as food and medicines, and lengthy power cuts, they took to the streets for months in 2022. Those protests culminated in the storming of the presidential palace in July that year, forcing former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to flee the country.

United National Party's Ranil Wickremesinghe assumed the presidency then and is standing as an independent now. He faces three other main competitors -- National People's Power (NPP) candidate Anura Kumara Dissanayake, Samagi Jana Balawegaya's (SJB) Sajith Premadasa and Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna's Namal Rajapaksa, scion of the powerful family that had dominated the nation's politics for over two decades.

Here are four things to know about the election:

What is the key issue on voters' minds?

Top of voters' concerns is economic stability and growth. The 17.1 million registered voters want to know how to improve their financial health and the plans the next government has to target the corruption they blame for their misery. Although shortages have eased, Sri Lankans still face high costs of living and a squeeze on public spending as the Wickremesinghe administration restructures the country's debt to meet conditions laid out by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for a bailout. Sri Lankans largely blame the Rajapaksas for the state of the economy. The Supreme Court ruled late last year that Gotabaya and Mahinda Rajapaksa were among 13 former leaders guilty of economic mismanagement that led to the crisis.

Who are the main candidates?

A total of 38 candidates have entered the race, although there are only four main contenders. Antiestablishment opposition parliamentarian Dissanayake, leader of NPP, an alliance of left-leaning groups, has captured the imagination of many voters.

Competing with him is another parliamentary opposition leader, Premadasa, leader of SJB, a center-left alliance.

The main candidates have assured voters they will not tear up the IMF's economic recovery blueprint, but voters are wary of the austerity measures required for Sri Lanka's US$3 billion bailout. As such, many are leaning toward positions offered by Dissanayake and Premadasa to tweak the IMF's benchmarks to provide economic relief to impoverished millions.

Premadasa told The Associated Press that his party was already in discussions with the IMF to ease the tax burden on the poor.

Trailing them are two candidates who are considered pillars of the status quo and seemingly out of step with the public: the incumbent Wickremesinghe and Namal Rajapaksa, nephew of Gotabaya and son of another former president, Mahinda.

Some, however, credit Wickremesinghe for stabilizing and even growing the economy. Sri Lanka reported on September 13 that its economy expanded 4.7% year-on-year in the April quarter.

Saturday's election will also bring Sri Lanka's strategic location into sharp focus, as Asian rivals India and China have stakes in the outcome.

A victory for Dissanayake, whose main constituent party has Marxist and revolutionary roots, is expected to pave the way for Beijing to regain some of the foothold it has lost to New Delhi during the Wickremesinghe presidency.

India, according to Colombo-based diplomatic sources, prefers a Premadasa presidency.

How will the winner be decided?

Voter turnout for presidential elections typically hovers in the healthy 70% range, sometimes higher. Traditionally, voters choose one of two main candidates. The candidate with the majority of votes -- 50% plus one vote -- will be named president. This time, though, there are four main competitors, meaning a scenario could arise in which no one candidate reaches the majority threshold. As such, voters are asked in this election to mark the numbers 1, 2 and 3 against their top three choices. In the event no one wins a majority, the election will go to a second round, which only involves an additional count. The two candidates with the most votes in the first round will be pitted against each other. Ballots that had either one of them as their second or/and third choices will be added to their tallies. The one with the highest total will win the election. There is no time limit for the second round.

Why is there anxiety about the transition of power?

Concerns about a smooth transition of power have once again emerged, as they did after previous polls. Sri Lankans are worried that any period of political uncertainty after a potential second round could leave room for exploitation by political opportunists within the incumbent government.

Courtesy: Nikkei Asia

 

 

 

China Prompts Oil Price Crash

The marked shift in oil sentiment recently has been to a great deal prompted by a widespread concern of Chinese demand peaking this or next year as LNG displaces diesel in long-haul trucking, EV sales overtaking conventional cars since July and rail expansion eating into jet fuel recovery.

Chinese refinery runs have been declining for five straight months, with the National Bureau of Statistics reporting throughput rates at 13.91 million b/d in August amidst a widespread decline in Shandong teapot runs, as low as 55% last month. 

Meanwhile, Asian refiners’ margins slumped to the lowest seasonal levels since 2020 as high inventories of diesel and gasoline become an increasingly worrying factor as peak summer demand tapers off.

China’s clampdown on tax evasion is aggravating the pressure on refiners after a Shandong court ruled two refiners run by state-owned firm Sinochem, the Huaxing and Zhenghe plants totalling 220,000 b/d in capacity, fully bankrupt. 

No war between China and Malaysia

The mere mention of the South China Sea these days conjures up an image of confrontation between China and rival claimants, military or otherwise. So many heads were turned following a leak of a diplomatic note from China to the Malaysian Embassy in Beijing calling on Kuala Lumpur to stop all drilling in the South China Sea. But we should not deduce that the Sino-Malaysian relationship is about to go south, argues Phar Kim Beng.

This is for several reasons, such as the two sides having developed the necessary channels of communication to handle friction, and that Malaysia has been the coordinator of the China-ASEAN relationship since last August.

This is illustrated by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim taking to using the word "discussion" to replace "negotiation" with China. While this does not hint at any short or long term solutions, neither is it a sign of China and Malaysia engaging in a war of words, let alone their militaries coming to blows.