China: Largest in maritime trade

Judging by the cargo flowing through Chinese maritime ports, the world’s export king still reigns despite efforts by the United States and Europe to diversify their trading relations.

That’s among the takeaways in the One Hundred Ports 2024 report this week from Lloyd’s List. China’s share of container volumes at the biggest 100 seaports globally rose to 41.3% last year, from 40.2% a year earlier, ten years ago the figure stood at 36.6%.

In a distant second place was the rest of Asia, which as a region had a 26.6% share, North America came in with 7.6% and Europe with 7.3%.

Linton Nightingale, deputy editor with Lloyd’s List, said China’s position as the Factory to the World “shows little sign of diminishing anytime soon.”

“Yes, shippers and manufacturers are looking to other countries to source goods in a bid to diversify supply chains — a trend that has accelerated off the back of the pandemic which caused a rethink on Chinese reliance,” he said. “But as our data shows, the world continues to rely heavily on its exports.”

Other key points from the report:

Of the world’s top 10 ports, measured by annual container throughput, seven are in China

The steepest climber on the list was China’s Jiaxing, which jumped 17 places to 58th

Rotterdam, a top-10 finisher in last year’s ranking, fell to 12th

Dubai climbed two spots to No. 9

The two biggest US ports each slipped two places — Los Angeles to No. 18 and Long Beach to 21st

In a world where trade is a key battlefield for opposing economic powers, the reason why rankings matter goes beyond bragging rights. Ports are on the front lines of three major transformations: protectionism, digitization and de-carbonization.

As a result, they’re neglected no more and stand to benefit from more than US$200 billion in investments annually over the next decade, according estimates reported in ‘Bloomberg’s Big Take’. The story zooms in on eight of the world’s most dynamic ports, each trying to adapt to new geopolitical and business realities.

“Trade flows are changing and are growing more complex as shippers redirect cargoes to skirt mounting geopolitical tensions,” Nightingale said.

In China’s case, “the trade war with US is the most disruptive,” he said. “However, Chinese goods are still entering the US and often via other emerging economies, whether Mexico, Vietnam or India, to circumvent tariffs.”

Those alternative routes are among the reasons that China is withstanding tariffs, export controls and other measures wielded by the US and Europe, and may continue to do so as it expands into more advanced manufacturing.

According to a new research report from Lazard Geopolitical Advisory, “China is largely undiminished as an industrial and manufacturing powerhouse.”

“Subsidies appear to be fueling a shift away from products that helped create the Chinese miracle of the 1990s and 2000s, like textiles and toys, into higher value-added products like computers and electric vehicles, driven by domestic Chinese firms,” Lazard’s report said.

“Geopolitical tension and economic struggles must therefore be weighed against the reality that China is still the largest global exporter of goods and may succeed in its pivot to more high-tech products.”

 

Pakistan: Oil and Gas Reserves Update

According to a report by IMS Securities, as per the latest hydrocarbon reserves data released by PPIS, as of June 2024, Pakistan’s total Oil reserves increased by 26% to 243 million barrels whereas Gas reserves were up slightly by 2% to 18.5tcf as compared to the reserves as of December 2023.

The substantial increase in oil reserves is primarily attributed to the improvement in oil reserves of OGDC, up 64%, while MARI’s oil reserves have doubled since December 2023, reaching 13.4 million barrels (similar to Tal block’s current reserves of 16.7 million barrels).

Despite the much-awaited addition of reserves of Bannu West (Shewa) and reserves upgrade of Mari Ghazij, overall gas reserves saw only a modest 2% increase, largely because of decline in other major fields.

Overall, a significant improvement in oil reserves was observed, largely due to the reserve upgrades of listed E&P companies, driven by the addition of Shewa and the reserve upgrades of Bolan East, Kunar, and Pasakhi/ Pasakhi North. This development is more favorable for OGDC and MARI as compared to PPL and POL.

 

Iranian Court commence trail of US Administration

According to the Tehran Times, an Iranian court has commenced the trial of the US administration and its officials for their role in the 1953 coup against the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. 

The first session was held on Sunday, marking the 71st anniversary of the coup, at the 55th branch of the court dealing with international affairs in Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Judicial Complex. 

This lawsuit, brought by some 402,000 Iranians, targets six American individuals and legal entities for their involvement in the ousting of Mosaddegh, which paved the way for the pro-Western monarchy of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi until the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Lawyer Shami Aghdam, representing the plaintiffs, stated that "documents show the US spy agency CIA, with the help of its British counterpart MI6, planned the coup by using internal and external agents against the legitimate government of Iran on August 19, 1953." 

Aghdam further explained that Washington and London designed the military coup through violating international principles and rules, and interfering in the internal affairs of Iran, intending to maintain their influence and power in the government, securing their interests and looting the country’s property.

He added that the coup was carried out by military and political figures affiliated with the US and British governments, as well as "thugs."

Aghdam concluded by stating that In fact, the coup marked the beginning of Washington’s complete domination over Iran to make it more dependent than before and prevent its independence and progress. The domination lasted for more than 25 years and inflicted costs, as well as material and spiritual damage, on the country and the nation.

The 1953 coup in Iran is known as Operation Ajax by the United States and its lesser-involved ally, Britain. The putsch happened after the Brits took umbrage at Mosaddegh’s decision to nationalize the Iranian oil industry, previously controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). This move angered Britain, which relied heavily on Iranian oil.

After failing to force the Iranian Prime Minister to walk back on his decision through an economic siege, London decided to seek direct help from the US, who Mosaddegh believed could be a relying partner for Iran in the absence of Britain. 

The CIA, under the direction of Kermit Roosevelt Jr., began planning the coup in early 1953. The operation aimed to create unrest and discredit Mossadegh while rallying support for the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The CIA’s main tool to incite public discontent against Mossadegh was propaganda. Americans portrayed the leader as a communist threat, while also funding opposition groups and organizing violent demonstrations.

On August 19, 1953, the coup was executed. Initially, it faced setbacks, but after some strategic adjustments and further riots, military forces loyal to the Shah took control of Tehran. Mossadegh was arrested, and the Shah was reinstated with increased power.

As stated by many historians as well as top Iranian figures and politicians, the coup toppling Mosaddegh in 1953 opened the floodgates to decades of the US meddling in Iran’s internal affairs. The upheaval, though bitter in nature, also became the first lesson that Iranians learnt, the US cannot be trusted when it comes to respecting the sovereignty, integrity, and independence of other countries. 

“There are some people who say that we should somehow compromise with the US because this way, their enmities might decrease. No, [This is not right]. They have not even shown mercy to those who trusted, pinned their hopes on, and referred to the US for assistance,” Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei explained during a gathering in 2017.  “Who for example?

Dr. Mosaddegh. In order to fight and stand up against the English – this is what he wished to do – he turned to the Americans. He met with and negotiated with them and asked for their help. He trusted them. [But] The coup d'état of the 28th of Mordad (1953 coup) was not launched by the English, rather it was launched by the US against Mosaddegh.”

 

Bangladesh: Yunus faces a rough terrain

Nobel Peace Prize-winning economist Muhammad Yunus has become the leader of Bangladesh's caretaker government on August 08, 2024 following weeks of turmoil that began when student-led protests rose up against the government and climaxed with the dramatic resignation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

As Yunus and the interim government have tough work ahead to quell social unrest, they also have to deal with mounting expectations for structural reforms and prepare for free and fair elections to be held sometime soon.

Who is this Nobel Prize winner, what sparked the rage that chased away Hasina and how are neighboring countries reacting?

Yunus is best known for his work with Grameen Bank, which traces its origins to small unsecured loans he began making to poor families in 1974. Hasina saw this champion of the underclass as a political threat, indicting him on what many saw as a long history of trumped-up charges.

Bangladesh was under the firm grip of Hasina until a few weeks ago. With her now out of the country, many citizens are waking up to a hopeful future for "a new Bangladesh" under the nonpartisan interim government headed by an 84-year-old economist, despite a series of economic challenges and the lingering effects of unrest.

Hasina enjoyed a good relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. But in the wake of her resignation and fleeing the country, uncertainty hangs over the two nations. As India's biggest South Asian trading partner, Bangladesh has received much investment from its neighbor, politically and financially

Hasina had recently signed a slew of economic, trade and public health agreements with China. With the countries also having elevated their relationship to a "comprehensive strategic cooperative partnership," how will Beijing find working with the next government?

For Yunus, who will lead the caretaker administration, the first and most urgent task will be to reestablish the rule of law.

However, the bigger and more difficult tasks will be to prevent interference of United States and continue to receive aid/ financial support from China and Russia.

Yunus has to quickly come up with a “home grown plan” to break the IMF shekels. The largest source of foreign exchange for Bangladesh is “textiles and clothing” and the major buyers are United States and members of European Union, who may opt for pressure tactics to keep Bangladesh away from China and Russia.

Europe planning Abraham Accords II

According to the Tehran Times, France, Germany, and Britain intend to join the 146 countries recognizing Palestine as a state, contingent upon significant concessions from Iran, including its recognition of Israel and a halt to support for resistance groups in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria.

The initiative proposed by France and endorsed by Britain and Germany aims to offer additional protections for Israel but does not establish any conditions to safeguard Palestinians against Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied territories, its massacres in Gaza, the abuse of Palestinian prisoners, or the growing number of illegal settlements in the West Bank.

If the initiative is implemented, the European trio will align with their counterparts in Norway, Ireland, and Spain, who became the latest group of European countries to recognize Palestine as a state earlier this year. While the May decision drew fury from the Israeli regime, it failed to stop the ongoing suffering of Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories.

According to information gathered by the Tehran Times, White House officials have expressed their support for the European plan as they view it as a continuation of the 2020 Abraham Accords, which led to recognition of Israel's sovereignty over Palestinian territories by some Arab and African nations, including the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan.

Saudi Arabia was on the verge of joining the accords before the outbreak of the latest round of Israeli onslaughts in Gaza. 

Some critics in Europe and the US have warned that even if Iran were to acknowledge Israel and distance itself from the resistance, Israel would not be granted the security it desires. Rather, the move would reinforce the regime's unlawful practices and hinder any prospects for a genuine peace process. They highlight that the Abraham Accords did not stop the successful Hamas operation on October 7, when Palestinian fighters seized control of several Israeli settlements for hours and took some Israelis to Gaza.

Sources have told the Tehran Times that voices averse to the initiative believe Western leaders should recognize and respect Palestinians’ rights, instead of turning to regional countries to strengthen Israel’s hand. 

The Tehran Times understands that besides the perceived impracticality and ineffectiveness of the initiative, some in Europe and the United States also believe that Iran is highly unlikely to acquiesce to Europe's demands.

Nevertheless, the leaders of France, Germany, and Britain intend to promote the initiative in the future as a way to vindicate themselves following months of intense criticism regarding their support for Israel’s devastating campaign in Gaza. 

Europe intends to throw the ball in Iran’s court and blame it for the crisis in Gaza after Tehran rejects the initiative, the Tehran Times was informed. Rather than a genuine attempt at peace, Europe’s proposed recognition of Palestine is a calculated move to shift blame onto Iran. 

In the past 10 months, over 40,000 Palestinians have lost their lives as a direct result of Israeli attacks on the besieged enclave. War experts say at least 100,000 more people will end up losing their lives, due to the complete decimation of medical centers in Gaza, as well as an acute shortage of food, clean water, and medicine.

 

Uzbekistan and Afghanistan sign agreements

Uzbek Prime Minister Abdulla Aripov arrived in Afghanistan on Saturday, marking the highest-level visit by a foreign official since the Taliban returned to power three years ago.

Aripov, leading a delegation, was welcomed at Kabul airport by Abdul Salam Hanafi, the Taliban’s deputy prime minister, and other senior government officials, according to a statement from Afghanistan's Ministry of Industry and Commerce.

During his visit, Aripov met with Taliban leaders to discuss bilateral relations, with a focus on strengthening trade and business ties between the two countries. The talks resulted in the signing of five trade and investment agreements.

Additionally, the officials are set to inaugurate an exhibition of Uzbek products in Afghanistan.

Earlier in the week, an Uzbek delegation engaged in meetings with Afghanistan's Ministry of Commerce. On Friday, Afghan media reported a trilateral meeting among the economy ministers of Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan in Kabul to explore ways to enhance trade relations.

Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, which share a 144-kilometer (89-mile) border, have seen a recent improvement in relations.

The Taliban, who seized power in Afghanistan in August 2021 as US and NATO troops withdrew, have yet to be recognized by the international community due to concerns over their restrictive policies.

 

Bangladesh: Breaking free from Indian octopus

We are pleased to share with our readers a letter by Mahmudur Rahman published in South Asia Journal. He has talked in the least number of words about Indian hegemony in the region,

In the later years of my life, I completed a PhD thesis titled “The Rise of Indian Hegemony in South Asia and the Security of Small States.” This work was finalized in mid-2022, a period marked by the authoritarian rule of Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh, who maintained a firm grip over a population of 180 million. In brief, the conclusions of my research were as follows:

• As soon as British colonial rule in the subcontinent ended in 1947, India embarked on a relentless quest to establish complete hegemonic control over the region.

• Despite being relatively weaker both militarily and economically, Pakistan emerged as the primary regional barrier to India’s ambitions. Beyond the region, China also posed a formidable challenge to India’s hegemonic aspirations.

• Indian hegemony has been thwarted in Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan, and the Maldives.

• India has only managed to establish hegemony over Bhutan and Bangladesh in the region. In the case of Bhutan, this dominance has been maintained through a treaty signed in 1949, allowing Delhi to exercise absolute authority to this day. Consequently, Bhutan has been prevented from establishing official diplomatic relations with any of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—the United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and France. In contrast, India’s dominance over Bangladesh was achieved without any formal hegemonic treaty. Instead, India installed a brutally oppressive puppet government in 2009.

In the great revolution of August, the courageous students and citizens of Bangladesh, through unforgettable sacrifices and acts of heroism, have successfully overthrown the puppet regime installed by India. The murderous fascist Sheikh Hasina has fled to her master, India, to escape the public’s wrath. In a cruel twist of history, the very daughters of the fallen dictator Sheikh Mujib, who had come from Delhi in 1981 to execute India’s mission in Bangladesh, have now been humiliatingly forced to return to Delhi after forty-three years. The people of Bangladesh have, at long last, awakened. However, in the meantime, Hasina, a lackey of Delhi, left behind a trail of destruction, dismantling every institution of the state.

The judiciary has been so severely compromised that it no longer retains any semblance of legitimacy in the eyes of the public. Back in 2010, I authored an editorial titled

“A Farce in the Name of Independent Justice,” which resulted in my prolonged detention and torture by the Detective Branch and Rapid Action Battalion. The young heroes of today’s revolution may not even be aware of these incidents.

Due to Sheikh Hasina’s ruthless use of the police as her personal death squad, this essential state institution has become the object of extreme public hatred. Sixteen years of disgraceful sycophancy from the media have left the so-called fourth estate of the state devoid of any credibility.

The civil administration has been debilitated by pervasive partisanship and corruption, while the nation has been plunged into insurmountable debt under the guise of fake development.

My sympathy lies with Dr. Yunus’s government, which has inherited this lamentable legacy. None of the statistics produced by the fallen government of Bangladesh can be considered credible.

Since 2018, I have repeatedly communicated with the World Bank, ADB, and IMF, bringing to their attention Sheikh Hasina’s corruption and the manipulation of statistics. However, my warnings have been consistently disregarded. Whether the officials in these institutions in Bangladesh were themselves complicit in Hasina’s corruption remains unknown, but how else could they have blindly accepted such false statistics year after year? Surely, they are not all fools.

The critical question now emerges, will India quietly endure this catastrophe?

The fall and flight of Sheikh Hasina in a bloodless revolution is not merely a diplomatic setback for Delhi; it represents the most devastating strategic defeat for India’s hegemonic ambitions in South Asia.

Even the humiliating defeat of the Indian military in Sri Lanka in 1989 is surpassed by the revolution in Bangladesh. The most remarkable achievement of the young revolutionaries lies in the fact that they accomplished this without any external support.

For fifty-three years, we have been paying for the assistance taken from India during the liberation war of 1971. While every political faction in the country, whether left or right, alongside the media and so-called intellectuals, has persistently invoked the memory of 1971, they have simultaneously exploited us economically and dominated our internal politics.

This time, no external power can claim any credit. The United States, despite its rhetoric on democracy and human rights, ultimately deferred to India’s stance on Bangladesh.

The people of Bangladesh have liberated themselves from the shackles of fascism through extraordinary courage and sacrifice, as exemplified by Abu Saeed’s martyrdom. We owe no debt of gratitude to anyone.

Internationally, Dr. Yunus is widely recognized for his close ties with the United States. However, neither he nor any other civil society figure played a pivotal role in this revolution.

Notably, I cannot recall any instance where Dr. Yunus has taken a decisive stance against Indian hegemony in Bangladesh, nor has he publicly condemned Hasina’s enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and human rights abuses. What he may have done behind the scenes is unknown to the public.

Indian Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has always been vocal against Modi’s Hindutva and misrule. Nevertheless, we want to hope that Dr. Yunus will now take a stand against Indian hegemony. As the primary beneficiary of the people’s revolution, he bears a responsibility to repay the debt he owes to the people of Bangladesh.

Although more than a week has passed since the formation of the new government, we have yet to hear any statements from those in power regarding the lopsided agreements with India.

This piece concludes with a call for the formulation of a strategy, in unison with the people, to free Bangladesh from the clutches of the Indian octopus. Long live the revolution.

Bangladesh Zindabad.