GSEF Series | ASEAN and the Global Supply Chain: An Analysis of Competitive Advantages in Logistics and Trade
Read The Impact Paper:
ASEAN and the Global Supply Chain: An Analysis of Competitive Advantages in Logistics and Trade
India and GCC Deepen Economic and Strategic Ties
India and GCC Deepen Economic and Strategic Ties
Balaji Chandramohan
As India expands its politico-economic reach in the international system, especially in Asia’s geopolitics – it is looking for economic partners in the Gulf region as part of its aspirations. This will be welcomed by the countries in the region collectively, as they tend to recognize New Delhi’s credentials as a responsible power in the comity of nations. Institutionally, cooperation will be strengthened between India and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which will have vital significance for India. The GCC is a union of six countries in the Gulf region — Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, and Bahrain. The council is the largest trading bloc for India.
Experts note that the Gulf region’s substantial oil and gas reserves are of immense importance for India’s energy security and its growing population’s demands. India’s economic ties with the GCC have been steadily increasing, especially due to the growth in oil imports.
On the other hand, India’s exports to the GCC have shown steady growth in recent times. India exports a wide range of products to the region, including food processing, jewellery, synthetic fibers, textiles, pharmaceuticals, and engineering goods, all offering substantial potential.
Further, in an effort to improve their trade relations, India and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) have agreed to pursue a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the two regions. Negotiations are set to increase in the upcoming months.
Meanwhile, India has started important geo-economic outreach to the Gulf region, which includes facilitating financial connectivity, such as integrating India’s UPI system with the UAE’s JAYWAN card. The RuPay card is also being considered.
Investment opportunities from Sovereign Wealth Funds in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and Kuwait are being closely observed from New Delhi. It is also a fact that the Gulf region forms an important cog in the world’s geo-economics, as it connects Europe to the markets in Asia and to the wider Indo-Pacific region.
Additionally, the GCC countries collectively host a large Indian expatriate community, facilitating cooperation in terms of trade and investment. Through collaborative initiatives in trade, investment, infrastructure development, open exchange of information, and people-to-people ties, this partnership not only bolsters economic growth within the region and India, but also contributes to a more stable and prosperous global economy.
India and the GCC also share a desire for political stability and security in the region, which may help India expand its outreach to other regions globally in terms of the economy. India recognizes that the Gulf region is one of the most volatile in Asia, where special focus is required if it is to strengthen its credentials as a stable economic partner.
Institutional exchanges between India and GCC countries began with the first-ever India-GCC Political Dialogue, held on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly on September 26, 2003. Both sides recognized the significance of this dialogue, which marked a new era in India-GCC relations at the start of this century.
Subsequently, India and the GCC signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the Mechanisms of Consultations on September 10, 2022, during Indian Foreign Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar’s visit to Riyadh (September 10-12, 2022) to facilitate better trade. This was followed by the first India-GCC Senior Officials Meeting, held on March 20, 2023, in Riyadh.
The dialogue also highlighted emerging opportunities in education and connectivity, especially through the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, which presents significant potential for growth by linking energy-rich markets of Europe to Asia.
In 2024, the first-ever India–GCC Joint Ministerial Meeting for Strategic Dialogue was held on September 9, 2024, in Riyadh, emphasizing the importance of combining geo-economics with strategy.
The ministerial meeting also adopted a Joint Action Plan 2024-2028 for undertaking various joint activities in diverse areas, including health, trade, security, agriculture and food security, transportation, energy, culture, and others.
India’s outreach to the GCC was further strengthened when Indian External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar visited Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from September 8-9, 2024, to attend the first-ever India–GCC Joint Ministerial Meeting for Strategic Dialogue, which had important economic implications. This marked the inaugural meeting between India and the GCC at the Foreign Ministers level, attended by the Foreign Ministers of all GCC countries and Jasem Mohamed Albudaiwi, Secretary General of the GCC.
Dr. Jaishankar’s participation in the multilateral dialogue underscored a significant qualitative leap in bilateral and multilateral relations between India and the Arab Gulf states. The India–GCC Joint Ministerial meeting emphasized the growing economic partnership between India and the GCC, focusing on collaboration in economic trade, foreign investment, infrastructure development, and people-to-people ties.
The meeting envisaged the Joint Action Plan for 2024-2028, outlining various joint activities in sectors such as health, trade, security, agriculture, food security, transportation, energy, and culture. The scope of cooperation may expand further, subject to mutual consensus.
The Indian Foreign Minister also used the opportunity to hold several bilateral meetings with the Foreign Ministers of GCC countries. Jaishankar pointed out that the GCC is a “cornerstone of global energy supply” and called for deepening collaboration, which he said would help “stabilize markets, drive innovation, and enhance energy security.”
Following the Indian External Affairs Minister’s visit, the UAE reinforced its economic priorities with India, as Sheikh Khaled bin Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, visited India from September 9-10, 2024, at the invitation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
During his visit, he met with President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Besides the political significance, the visit included participation in a business forum in Mumbai, strengthening economic ties between India and the UAE. Four significant agreements were signed between Indian and UAE entities in the energy sector.
As part of the state visit, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on the operations and maintenance of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant between Emirates Nuclear Energy Company (ENEC) and Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) was proposed.
In addition to multilateral cooperation, bilateral relations between India and the UAE have seen a notable upswing in recent years, with approximately 3.5 million Indians forming the largest expatriate group in the UAE. The two countries are among each other’s top trading partners, with bilateral trade reaching USD 85 billion in the 2022-23 financial year. India’s relations with the Arab Gulf countries are a vital pillar of its foreign policy, given the shared interests between the two sides, the presence of about 9 million Indian workers in the Gulf, and significant trade exchange. Security and strategic relations, as well as energy provision, remain crucial areas of collaboration.
As both India and the Gulf States look towards the future, there is growing anticipation of further deepening ties to advance economic cooperation, regional stability, and international security.
In conclusion, as India aspires to a better position as a global economic powerhouse, it will naturally look to the Gulf countries as part of its economic aspirations. In that context, as the GCC countries also recognize India’s emergence as one of the fastest-growing economies and a market for their exports, they will increasingly gravitate towards New Delhi. Therefore, India–GCC economic cooperation will translate into substantial geo-economic cooperation, which may strengthen existing political relations in the years to come.
[ The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the views of COGGS. ]
India and GCC Deepen Economic and Strategic Ties Read Post »
Why BRICS, Global South need Angola?
[ The piece is syndicated from The Week, followed by Angolan President João Lourenço’s maiden visit to India. The title of the article differs from the article published in the Indian magazine. Author is a fellow and content editor at COGGS. ]
Ayanangsha Maitra
POWER MAY ONCE have been spilled from the barrel of a gun, but Angola is showing the energy-starved Global South that today, it flows from the barrel of crude oil. As Angolan President João Lourenço visited India on his maiden trip to India earlier this month (May 2-4), two nations from opposite ends of the world found themselves co-architects of a new multipolar order.
President Lourenço—a former freedom fighter who took up arms to liberate the motherland from Portuguese colonial rule—reached New Delhi at a time when both countries are pushing to reform global institutions and rebalance power dynamics. His visit is more than ceremonial; it signalled the elevation of India-Angola ties into a deep partnership grounded in energy, defence, technology, and developmental aspirations.
India is already one of Angola’s largest buyers of oil and gas. Now, the relationship is expanding far beyond hydrocarbons. Following bilateral talks, both countries committed to deep cooperation in digital public infrastructure, space technology, defence, diamond processing, healthcare, and critical minerals. India has offered a $200 million defence credit line to modernise Angola’s armed forces and will help train its military personnel.
Sitting on the southwestern coast of Africa, Angola is working to reduce its economic dependence on oil by attracting investments from China, the UAE, and Portugal, particularly in infrastructure, ports, railways, and energy. India, too, sees an opportunity: the potential introduction of Indian diesel locomotives and the expansion of Angola’s railways—especially into mineral-rich regions—could be transformative. As India’s Economic Envoy Dammu Ravi noted, “There is a possibility to introduce Indian diesel locomotives and also expand the railway network interior, north-south and east-west and leading into the areas of their minerals, which are very important for them in terms of logistics.”
Despite $4.2 billion in bilateral trade, Angola enjoys a major surplus. India imports around $3.5 billion—mostly oil—while exporting less than $700 million in goods such as medicines, meat, textiles, cotton, chemicals, leather items, tractors, and vehicles. Angola sends iron, copper, aluminium, and other minerals in return, apart from energy. Reducing this imbalance will require India to push for better market access and explore investment-led growth in Angola.
Angola is habitat to around 8,000 people of Indian origin and has recently implemented visa-free entry for Indian citizens to promote tourism and business. The historical links are not just symbolic. Goa and Angola, once colonies under Portuguese rule, share cultural resonances. Pandurang Shirodkar, the first speaker of the Goa legislative assembly and an early supporter of Angola’s independence, was imprisoned and deported to Angola by the colonial regime—an overlooked but powerful connection.
India inspired and supported Angola’s liberation movement, and post-independence, India backed the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA). The two are vocal at the forums like Non-Alignment Movement.
Unlike India, Angola’s real soft power doesn’t lie in cultural exports like Bollywood or the Taj Mahal. Instead, it lies in Sonangol, its oil giant. Formed in 1976, the state-owned Sonangol is now Africa’s second-largest oil producer and one of its most diversified corporations, with stakes in telecoms, shipping, engineering, and even shipbuilding. The company’s PAENAL shipyard hosts Africa’s largest heavy-lifting crane—a symbol of Angola’s industrial ambition. India is already partnering on key infrastructure projects such as the Moçâmedes Railway and sees potential for deeper collaboration in satellite technology, where ISRO could play a future role. Angola currently works with Russia and France on space applications, but India’s affordable space programme offers an attractive alternative.
Angola also holds growing geopolitical relevance. As chair of the African Union—whose entry into the G20 was strongly backed by India—Luanda is poised to shape continental strategies. Its ties within the Community of Portuguese Language Countries (CPLP) also give it leverage in Latin America, especially Brazil. The cultural and strategic alignment with lusophone nations puts Angola at the crossroads of continents and makes a link between Latin America and Africa.
Moreover, Angola’s recent role as a mediator in the Rwanda- DR Congo peace talks and President Lourenço’s strong condemnation of the Pahalgam terror attack highlight its emergence as a responsible global actor. As Angola discovers new oil fields, India’s expertise in refining, transport, and energy infrastructure could play a vital role in translating resources into growth.
Angola’s participation in the India-led Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, Big Cat Alliance and Global Biofuels Alliance would be a transformative episode. Yet the challenge remains: to ensure this relationship doesn’t plateau at trade. Without active investment, deeper cultural exchange, and expanded cooperation, passive trade imbalances could undercut long-term goodwill. This is the moment to build a robust, reciprocal trade partnership—one that connects Luanda and New Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Mysore, Calcutta and Goa not just through products, but through values, and opportunity. Angola’s position within BRICS—attending summits and maintaining separate ties with each of the BRICS nations—further cements its strategic weight. If BRICS expands further in Africa, Angola could become a cornerstone in fulfilling the energy and development needs of the Global South. Private companies from Russia and India should exercise a greater role to make the nation glitter, by penetrating into areas like agri-tech.
However, to address the persistent trade imbalance, India must seek greater market access in Angola and across the region. A passive trade dynamic risks undermining the healthy and warm relationships between the two aspiring global south powers.
Why BRICS, Global South need Angola? Read Post »
President Trump in Saudi, UAE, Qatar: What Gulf States Want from the US?
Ayanangsha Maitra
The US PRESIDENT, Donald Trump, will emplane for a three-nation state visit, with Saudi Arabia as the first stop on May 13 (Tuesday). The Republican President will then go to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, two of the non-NATO yet prime security partners of the US. During his visit, which runs through May 16, various announcements, negotiations, and strategic decisions are expected. Whether Persian Gulf to be called by the same name – his visit will bring clarity.
Although the visit comes amid ongoing regional crises in Gaza and Iran, but the agendas will be on economic deals rather than immediate diplomatic breakthroughs. During President Trump’s Middle East visit, talks on Gaza, Ukraine, and Iran will be tabled. Meanwhile, Muscat has successfully concluded 4th round of informal talks between Tehran and Washington. The US could raise Oman Talks issue here too. During the middle-east visit, Trump’s agenda features major announcements in trade, oil, defense, nuclear energy, and technology, as Gulf leaders actively compete to secure American favour and future cooperation by offering substantial deals and investment commitments. In March, Trump said he would visit Saudi Arabia if it invests $1 trillion in the US. Saudi Arabia did not confirm this amount. But in January, the Kingdom said it would increase trade and investment with the US by $600 billion over four years. There could be more investment in coming years.
Gulf States want the US to confirm its security support for the region. Last year, the US and Saudi Arabia nearly finished a major defense and trade agreement. The talks stopped because Saudi Arabia wanted Israel to agree to a plan for Palestinian statehood. The Kingdom of Saudi wants US help to build a civil nuclear program. The talks are delayed because Saudi Arabia wants to enrich uranium in its own country. The US and Israel worry this could lead to nuclear weapons. Uranium can be used for weapons if enriched to high levels.
Saudi Arabia wants to depend less on oil. It still needs to sell oil at good prices to pay for this change. Price drops, US tariffs, and threats could make this harder. Trump wants oil prices to stay high. Saudi Arabia also wants high oil prices to help its economy grow.
Each Gulf nation is leveraging its financial power and personal ties with Trump to pledge multibillion-dollar investments in the U.S. economy, purchase American-made weaponry, and expand partnerships in advanced sectors, all aimed at strengthening their strategic alliance with Washington and maximizing their own national interests.
A stable Middle East is the need of the West as well as global south – not just the middle east. It helps lower migration, keeps energy markets steady, and limits the spread of extremist ideas. President Trump will be accompanied by a business delegation who will seize investment opportunities across sectors.
Education has been a key part of Saudi-US ties. The King Abdullah Scholarship Program has sent thousands of Saudi students to study in the United States. American students have also studied in Saudi Arabia through programs like the Fulbright exchange and partnerships with US universities. The US remains important for Saudi Arabia, especially in areas like energy transition, clean technology, and digital transformation.
Since 1974, six US presidents have visited Saudi Arabia. These visits show Saudi Arabia’s lasting role as a stabilizing force in a region often facing conflict. Presidential visits to Saudi Arabia are a tradition that began after the country was unified by King Abdulaziz Al-Saud in 1932. In 1945, President Franklin D. Roosevelt met King Abdulaziz after World War II, marking the start of close ties.
In 1957, King Saud became the first Saudi king to visit the US, meeting President Eisenhower. This visit focused on finding long-term solutions for the region and led to efforts to strengthen the Saudi military. King Faisal visited President Johnson in 1966 and President Nixon in 1971. In 1974, the US and Saudi Arabia created a joint economic commission to work together on industry, education, technology, and farming. In the same year, President Nixon reciprocated the visit to Saudi Arabia, forming the growing ties.
In 1982, Vice President George H. W. Bush visited Riyadh to offer condolences after King Khalid’s death, highlighting the personal side of the relationship. In 2002, the two countries started the Saudi-US Strategic Dialogue during King Abdullah’s visit to President George W. Bush in Texas, focusing on cooperation in counterterrorism, energy, education, and the economy. In 2012, the GCC-US Strategic Forum began, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attending the first meeting in Riyadh, raising the Gulf Cooperation Council’s role in US regional plans. In 2017, President Trump visited Riyadh, holding three major summits: the Arab Islamic American Summit, the US-Saudi Bilateral Summit, and the US-GCC Cooperation Council Summit.
UAE
The main objectives of President Donald Trump’s visit to the United Arab Emirates , in the second leg of middle east tour, is to secure major economic agreements and investments that align with his “America First” or Make America Great Again agenda. Trump aims to attract substantial new investments from the UAE and other Gulf states into the U.S. economy, particularly from sovereign wealth funds, to showcase job creation and bolster domestic manufacturing ahead of the 2026 election cycle. On the other hand, AI is one of the main trending issue between the two. The US and the United Arab Emirates are deepening their cooperation in artificial intelligence through major joint investments, technology partnerships, and government agreements-highlighted by multi-billion-dollar deals between Emirati firms like MGX and G42 and U.S. companies such as Microsoft, as well as ongoing efforts to develop shared principles and a government-to-government memorandum of understanding to ensure AI is used safely, securely, and for mutual economic growth.
In March, the UAE announced a $1.4 trillion investment plan over ten years. This money will go to oil, semiconductors, manufacturing, and energy. US investments already add up to $1 trillion, according to US officials.
Economic and Investment Deals: The UAE is expected to announce significant investment commitments, with reports suggesting pledges totaling up to $1.4 trillion over the next decade, focusing on sectors such as energy, technology, and defense.
Defense and Technology Agreements: The UAE, along with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, is likely to commit to major purchases of American defense systems and technology, supporting both U.S. industry and regional security.
Energy Cooperation: Discussions may include increasing oil supplies and potential relaxation of U.S. export controls on energy and technology, as well as nuclear energy cooperation.
Geopolitical Alignment: Trump is expected to press the UAE to align more closely with U.S. interests in its strategic competition with China and to support U.S. positions on regional conflicts, including those involving Iran and the Israel-Gaza situation.
The visit will be highly ceremonial, with the UAE aiming to demonstrate its importance as a U.S. partner and to maximize its own leverage in bilateral relations. The UAE, along with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, views Trump’s return to office as a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to secure long-term economic and security advantages amid a prolonged trade war between US and China.
Qatar
Trump’s state visit to Qatar is seen as a “crescendo” in U.S.-Qatari relations, with both nations eager to showcase their partnership and announce new agreements across defense, trade, education, health, and technology. The Al Thanis have gifted President Trump a luxury Boeing 747-8 jet for temporary use as Air Force One -which is yet to be considered for acceptance.
Qatar’s diplomatic role in the region, its close ties with Syria’s leadership, and its emergence as a multinational business hub all position Doha as a critical player in Trump’s Middle East strategy. Needless to say, it’s Doha that played the most constructive role in the negotiation between the US and Taliban. Security is on the focus too. Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base is the largest U.S. military installation in the Middle East.
President Trump’s whirlwind three-nation middle east tour spotlights fierce regional competition for the US favour, with Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar leveraging mega-investments and defense deals to secure their strategic interests. As economic ambitions and security pledges dominate the agenda, Trump’s visit is bound to reshape alliances and recalibrate the balance of power in the Middle East region.
President Trump in Saudi, UAE, Qatar: What Gulf States Want from the US? Read Post »
Tariff Crisis a Wake-up call for Global South – Unite or Perish | Mohammed Saqib |
- Mohammed Saqib
THE US PRESIDENT Donald Trump’s recent sweeping tariff agenda represents perhaps the most aggressive trade policy initiative in modern history. It is another sign of U.S. arrogance and unilateralism that has sent shockwaves across global markets. The staggering tariffs on U.S. imports threaten a trade disruption, destabilizing the global economy. These measures will likely damage supply chains, cause inflation, lead to global market volatility, and disproportionately harm the Global South members.
The current tariff crisis is a wake-up call — unite or perish. It presents itself as not only a challenge, but also an opportunity for a unified Global South response, one that amplifies the voice and influence of developing nations in shaping international economic governance.
China faces punitive tariffs of up to a bizarre 245 percent, while India, though in a comparatively low position at 26 percent (currently on a 90-day hold), is in a precarious state between strategic autonomy and economic pragmatism.
The United States may label India “tariff king” for its trade practices, but it hypocritically imposes tariff burdens on nearly all its trade partners, regardless of their development status. This approach seems to be a strategy to reestablish unilateral U.S. dominance in global trade governance, in the guise of efforts to address trade deficits or protect American jobs.
The announced tariff on global imports shifts from targeted pressure to aggressive economic nationalism. Countries in the Global South, intricately linked to Chinese manufacturing networks, are bracing for a significant fallout.
Amid this economic chaos, the White House is using intimidation tactics. Policies are announced, held and withdrawn by the hour. Some nations are being tempted by offers of preferential market access from the United States in exchange for reducing their economic ties with China. However, countries should look at historical examples that strongly advise against falling into the trap of opportunism.
Negotiating individual deals with the United States may falsely suggest secure national interests but actually weaken collective bargaining power. Bilateral agreements offer neither security nor sustainability in a system that allows unilateral changes to rules. Global South members must understand that such deals can undermine their collective negotiating strength.
India and China, the fastest-growing large economies with a combined GDP of more than 22 trillion U.S. dollars and nearly 35 percent of the global manufacturing capacity, possess significant economic leverage. Their collaboration can potentially create substantial benefits for both themselves and the broader developing world.
By working together, the two countries can establish vital market access reciprocity, develop an alternative financial framework, harmonize technical standards and coordinate resources effectively for the Global South. This constructive partnership can pave the way for more equitable global economic governance. Moreover, accelerating de-dollarization and strengthening frameworks like the BRICS and New Development Bank could enhance their financial autonomy.
While India-China coordination is essential for an effective response, the broader Global South must be engaged. The Bandung Conference in 1955 and the WTO Bali Ministerial Conference in 2013 demonstrated the potential for South-South cooperation.
Developing nations can counter U.S. economic coercion and amplify their influence in international economic governance with solidarity, and India-China coordination is crucial. When these giants speak as one, the world will indeed listen.
[ Mohammed Saqib is an Economist and Convenor of COGGS. The article is syndicated from Xinhua News Agency. ]
Tariff Crisis a Wake-up call for Global South – Unite or Perish | Mohammed Saqib | Read Post »
Prez Trump’s Tariff to Reframe Global Commerce?
Ayanangsha Maitra
THROUGH A CASCADE of reforms on both the domestic and global fronts, President Donald Trump’s honeymooning administration of the US has been rapidly setting a legacy built on a personalized vision of governance and a rebranded nationalism – Make America Great Again. Tariffs, President Trump’s most favoured tool of economic statecraft, serve as both the emblem of this approach and its proving ground—nowhere more vividly than in his stance toward China. The announcement of 245 per cent tariff on China is just a threat to the nation alone but to other competitive economies as well.
For the uninitiated, the US goods trade with China rose to $582.4 billion in 2024. On the other hand the US goods imports from China in 2024 valued $438.9 billion, up 2.8 percent ($12.1 billion) from 2023, according to the secretariat of USTR. In 2024, the US recorded a goods trade deficit of $295.4 billion with China.
When President Donald Trump declared “the ball is in China’s court,” he cast the trade war in the language of sport—poised between chess-like strategy and the fluid urgency of football or cricket. China, like a batsman under hostile bowling or a team defending in extra time, faces the burden of response amid shifting rules and uneven ground. Yet in such high-stakes game, success lies not merely in reaction, but in redefining the field itself. While announcing such a move, the US administration accused Beijing of deliberately restricting main high-tech materials—such as gallium, germanium, and antimony—critical to the military, aerospace, and semiconductor sectors. In a retaliatory move, China intensified its control by suspending exports of six heavy rare earth metals and rare earth magnets.
🇨🇳 Victor Gao: “China is making sure that the U.S. gets the message. If you want to impose war on China, you get war. If you want to destroy China, you get destroyed… China won’t be pushed around. We will fight to the end, peacefully or otherwise.
— COMBATE |🇵🇷 (@upholdreality) April 17, 2025
President Xi Jinping’s South East State Visit
Over a state dinner in Malaysia, Chinese President Xi Jinping called China a collaborative partner ready to stand with Southeast Asia amid tensions over trade. During his five-day state visit to Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia—economies likely affected by U.S. tariffs—Xi pushed a message of free trade, regional unity, and economic cooperation.
Backed by China’s manufacturing power and control over key rare earth exports, Beijing signed new deals, including a joint railway project with Vietnam and increased market access for Vietnamese goods. On the other hand, China has been expanding diplomatic outreach to Europe, Japan, and South Korea to avoid isolation and stabilize supply chains. While the U.S. enters the trade war from a defiant economic position, China has been quietly preparing for years—leveraging diplomacy, trade, and strategic resources to counter U.S. hegemony in the trade.
How Much on What?
The newly announced US tariffs represent one of the most aggressive trade actions in recent years. This has hard-hitting consequences for consumers as well as businesses. Aimed primarily at curbing Chinese imports and boosting domestic production, the tariff hike impacts a wide range of products—from essential medical supplies to electronics and garments. As per The New York Times, the updated tariff structure includes some eye-popping figures: syringes and needles face a massive 245% tariff – while lithium-ion batteries are hit with 173%. Even seafood like squid isn’t spared, slapped with a 170% tariff. Clothing items such as woolen sweaters now carry a 169% tariff, and household goods like plastic dishes and toasters are taxed at 159% and 150% respectively.
High-tech and electronics items also take a hit. Electric vehicles are subject to a 148% tariff, toys and puzzles at 145%, and semiconductors—critical for nearly all modern devices—are taxed at 70%. Even daily-use items like aluminum foil (75%), car wheels (73%), and door hinges (67%) are affected. Even Laptops, now carry a 20% tariff.
A 245-percent tariff will make it impossible for China to sell to its largest market – the costs on both economies will be unimaginably high. But China is defiant and ready to fight whatever Washington announces. China under Xi Jinping has indeed mastered the art of negotiating trade terms and diplomacy, leveraging both strategic diplomacy and economic muscle to its advantage.
China’s diversification away from U.S. agricultural products extends well beyond soybeans, encompassing a broad range of farm goods and other key commodities. Amid trade war, Beijing’s strategic move involves shifting import sources, boosting domestic production, and employing trade and regulatory measures to reduce reliance on the U.S. and enhance food and energy security.
China has systematically reduced imports of several major U.S. agricultural products by sourcing from alternative countries and increasing domestic output:
Corn and Sorghum: China has sharply cut U.S. corn imports, which fell from $2.6 billion in 2023 to $561 million in 2024, while increasing purchases from Brazil, which has become China’s top corn supplier. Sorghum is also imported as a corn substitute, often from countries other than the US.
Meat and Poultry: Imports of U.S. beef, pork, and poultry have been curtailed significantly, with Beijing imposing tariffs and non-tariff barriers. For example, beef and poultry exports from the US to China have been halted or sharply reduced through these measures. China has also increased domestic livestock production and diversified meat imports from other markets.
Wheat and Barley: China imports wheat and barley partly for animal feed, with barley imports rising due to its use in feed and brewing.
In a strategic move, Beijing has diversified cotton imports. Vegetable oil sourcing from Russia and other countries have also been part of this diversification strategy. Imports of dairy items and aquatic goods have been affected by tariffs and trade policies immensely. China is booting up domestic production and sourcing from alternative suppliers to reduce dependency on the U.S.
Fruits and Vegetables are also included in China’s tariff hikes and import levies on U.S. products, encouraging diversification toward other countries.
China is increasing LNG imports from Russia, Qatar, Australia, and Malaysia while sharply reducing U.S. LNG imports due to tariffs and trade barriers. For instance, no U.S. LNG was imported in March 2025, with Russian LNG exports to China rising by 3.3% in 2024.
Crude Oil and Natural Gas: China sources crude oil mainly from Saudi Arabia and Russia, and natural gas from multiple countries to avoid dependence on any single supplier or route, enhancing energy security.
Since 2018, China has imposed retaliatory tariffs on about $21 billion worth of U.S. agricultural and food products, including soybeans, corn, sorghum, wheat, meat, aquatic products, cotton, fruit, dairy, and vegetables.
Food Security Laws: Implementation of robust food security laws aims at reducing waste and increasing domestic production capacity to lessen import dependence.
China has strengthened import arrangements with countries like Brazil, Russia, and others in Latin America and Asia to replace U.S. agricultural products and energy supplies.
The U.S.–China trade war under President Donald Trump has reached a turning point in global trade. The 245 percent tariff on Chinese goods shows the U.S. taking a strong stand to protect its industries and adjust the trade deficit. But China is not backing down. Instead, it’s roaring loudly. From the domains like food and energy to key materials across high-value sectors as well as essential ones, China is working to build long-term strength. This trade conflict is not just about numbers or tariffs -it is about setting the rules of the game in geoeconomics.
[ Ayanangsha Maitra is New Delhi based Editor, Contents, COGGS]
Watch Related COGGS Discussion and Subscribe to the YouTube channel
Prez Trump’s Tariff to Reframe Global Commerce? Read Post »
Transition in Syria : COGGS Advisor Explains Regime Change, Russo-Chinese Realignment
In a recent panel discussion in New Delhi, COGGS Advisor and acclaimed journalist Atul Aneja provided an analysis of the multifaceted web of regime changes, geopolitical upheavals, and developing global power dynamics. Speaking at India’s oldest state-administered (autonomous ) think-tank Indian Council for World Affairs, Aneja traced the roots of regime change in Syria strategies back to the collapse of the Soviet Union, which marked the beginning of a unipolar world order. He explained that this era saw the proliferation of regime change tactics such as colour revolutions and interventions facilitated by organizations like the USA based agencies like National Endowment for Democracy and USAID. He highlighted Yugoslavia’s breakup under the 42nd President Bill Clinton administration of the USA as the first successful experiment in this strategy, setting a precedent for similar actions in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, as well as North Africa.
Addressing the assembly of foreign policy observers in India’s capital, the China and Middle East specialist emphasized that these movements often masqueraded as grassroots democratic uprisings but were, in reality, geopolitically motivated interventions. Aneja further shared his experience as a journalist in Cairo during the Arab Spring, where he uncovered connections between movements like Egypt’s April 6th Youth Movement and external training programs in Serbia. These programs taught activists techniques for peaceful protests and resistance against state repression, facilitated by west-headquartered organizations such as Freedom House.
Turning Points: Libya and Syria
Libya’s 2011 uprising as a pivotal moment in regime change history. The NATO-led intervention that toppled Lybian President Muammar Gaddafi signified a shift in global power dynamics. However, Syria marked a turning point where Russia and China began actively resisting regime change efforts. Aneja argued that their vetoes against no-fly zones in Syria represented their first line of defense against Western-led interventions aimed at reshaping Eurasia.
He went on to explain that Syria’s survival was critical to preventing further destabilization in the region. The failure to achieve regime change in Syria during 2011-2012 eventually culminated in Bashar al-Assad’s consolidation of power.
Messianic Ideologies , Tensions and Russia’s Reaction
Aneja explained the ideological transformations within Israel and Iran, describing them as two messianic powers locked in competition. He expressed concerns about Israel’s evolving vision under Netanyahu’s leadership, which aligns with plans for a “Greater Israel” driven by radical ideologies. Similarly, Iran’s Shia beliefs about the return of the Mahdi shape its geopolitical strategies.
He emphasized that although Russia’s offer of Iran a nuclear umbrella could prevent direct conflict, it also runs the risk of escalating tensions into a world war in the event that Iran is attacked.
The Emerging Powers
According to Aneja, the importance of emerging economies like India and China in making reconciliation and balance in West Asia. He advocated for a shift away from Eurocentric diplomacy toward inclusive processes involving civilizational states. He further called for imaginative solutions within a multipolar world framework to address crises like those in Syria.
Atul Aneja’s insights offer a nuanced understanding of how historical events influence current geopolitical developments. His emphasis on inclusive diplomacy highlights opportunities for emerging powers to play a greater role in shaping global future. During his speech, the veteran journalist aptly stated, “Every crisis has a big opportunity,” signaling hope for constructive engagement amidst ongoing regional transformations.
Read Similar: Syria: Reincarnation or Revision?
[ The views expressed are solely those of the individual and do not represent the views, policies, or positions of COGGS in any capacity. Pls write to us for event briefs/ article submissions and Impact Paper queries: ayan@thegeoeconomics.com ]
Transition in Syria : COGGS Advisor Explains Regime Change, Russo-Chinese Realignment Read Post »
Global South, NATO, USAID and Trump’s Policy: Prez Reagan’s Aide Scot Faulkner
Ayanangsha Maitra
In a recent interview with COGGS, Scot Faulkner, a former aide to President Reagan and Chief Administrative Officer at the House of Representatives, provided insightful commentary on the current and potential future direction of American foreign policy, particularly under a returning Trump administration. Faulkner contrasted the US President Donald Trump’s approach, which he characterises as “America First” and somewhat isolationist, with the deeply ideological and strategically consistent approach of Reagan.
Key Foreign Policy Challenges and Trump’s Potential Responses
On Iran and Venezuela: Faulkner believes the Biden administration’s national security team was very weak, creating opportunities for adversaries. He suggests Trump will likely seek to shut down Iran due to its funding of terrorism and focus on reciprocal trade. Faulkner also raised the possibility of India developing internal energy sources like converting “Napa” into fuel to avoid underwriting these regimes. He indicated that energy is a significant driver of foreign policy for both India and the US. Iran and Venezuela are the two countries, nation like India used to heavily rely on oil imports but stopped import due to sanction concerns.
China: Faulkner views China as “Enemy Number One,” aiming for global dominance through economic and cultural means or potentially through military aggression. He suggested Trump might work with industry to bring manufacturing back to the US or out of China through tariff threats.
NATO: Calling himself a “big fan of NATO,” Faulkner acknowledged concerns about it losing its “heart”. He recalled his involvement in expanding NATO, particularly with Baltic countries seeking to cleanse themselves of Soviet oppression. He believes NATO remains crucial as a counterforce to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ambitions to rebuild the Soviet empire. According to him, President Putin, if given the opportunity, would take over Moldova and the Baltics and intimidate Poland. He sees NATO as the primary force to deter such actions, especially if Trump scales back US involvement.
The Global South: Faulkner is critical of the vast sums spent on aid through USAID since its inception in 1962, questioning whether it has led to significant positive change in many recipient countries, often still characterised by dictatorships and left-leaning strongmen. He argues that China has effectively gained influence in Africa and is attempting to do the same in South America by engaging with leaders and oligarchs. The American realpolitik thinker suggests a reassessment of US aid to ensure a better “return on investment,” moving away from ideologically driven projects towards more business-oriented approaches to counter Chinese influence. He cited his experience with the Peace Corps in Malawi as an example of well-run programs that can positively impact individuals and build goodwill.
Domestic Focus
Faulkner indicated that while Trump is bringing a “real strategy,” much of it is “isolationist based” and “America Focus based“. This domestic focus is driven by issues like the southern border, which Faulkner described as a major concern for voters due to the influence of Mexican cartels. He noted Trump’s designation of cartels as terrorist organisations and potential actions like drone strikes in Mexico to address the issue. Faulkner believes Trump’s initial focus will be on making America safe and secure domestically before potentially shifting back to a more outward focus.
Despite the perception of Trump’s unpredictability, Faulkner identified “America First” as a consistent theme. He believes securing the southern border and addressing domestic security issues will be key priorities for Trump’s administration.
Faulkner remarked the “revolving door” phenomenon where bureaucrats and diplomats transition to academia or think tanks after leaving government in the US. While he supports conservative think tanks as a counterbalance, he noted that left-leaning figures often receive lucrative book deals, think tank positions, or media gigs. He further stated that he advised the Trump transition team to pull security clearances from individuals who he believed had acted improperly, as these clearances hold significant financial value. His remarks suggest a significant divergence in foreign policy approaches between President Reagan and a returning President Trump. While Reagan operated within a well-defined ideological framework, Trump’s “America First” agenda prioritises domestic concerns and a more transactional approach to international relations.
Global South, NATO, USAID and Trump’s Policy: Prez Reagan’s Aide Scot Faulkner Read Post »
USAID Cut Widens Multipolarity in South, East Asia?
- Ayanangsha Maitra
MOST OF humanity in the world has lost in malaria or deadly deceases like tuberculosis – not the war. This is exactly why the USAID earned its reputation in the Global South by winning those wars and eradicating some of them absolutely and although it was an effective tool for the USA for excreting his mighty soft power, or say smart power. The United States Agency for International Development is better known by her nickname and highly popular in the low earning economies of the South and South East Asia for plenty of reason but mostly for reshaping the fate of health, education, and other humanitarian programs in the region.
The agency, symbolized by colours mirroring the American flag – white, red, and blue – operates on the “3Ds” framework: Diplomacy, Development, and Defense. In a dramatic move, the US President Donald Trump administration’s drastic cuts led to the abolition of 83% of USAID’s humanitarian programs around the geographies of the world. The Global South will feel the heat of the USAID restrictions, especially in the front of humanitarian assistance and long-term development initiatives. A host of INGOs and NGOs spread across the continents are forced to halt critical services even in the areas like health and nutrition, which are vital for vulnerable populations in developing countries. If USAID funding were halted for even a year, about 23 economies could experience shocks exceeding 1% of their Gross National Income, with some countries facing declines of over 3%. This is particularly critical for low-income nations that rely heavily on the U.S. aid say for example Nepal and Afghanistan. The cessation of support for health initiatives, such as those targeting malaria and HIV/AIDS, poses severe risks. For instance, the withdrawal of USAID support in regions like Myanmar could lead to a resurgence of diseases previously under control, threatening millions of lives in the impulsive nation, ruled by the junta. With USAID funding cuts impacting the World Food Programme, humanitarian aid delivery has been severely hampered, particularly in these two regions facing drought and conflict. South and South East Asia – both regions are leaders in agriculture and the both are also improving in the fisheries sector.
USAID: The Genesis and Programme
In 1961, at the height of the Cold War, President Kennedy incepted USAID via executive order to counter Soviet influence abroad, based on the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act. Congress formalized the agency as an independent agency in 1998, placing it within the executive branch but under the policy direction of the Secretary of State. Congress funds the agency every year. Under the Trump administration in 2025, the agency’s staff was significantly reduced, from over 10,000 employees to just a few hundred, with thousands more placed on administrative leave. USAID provides most of the U.S. aid for development and humanitarian needs around the world. In 2023, the agency allocated about $44 billion to 160 countries. Most of that money went to Europe and Eurasia, and sub-Saharan Africa. The embattled nation Ukraine received the largest share, almost 37% of the total. Several Global South countries rely on US foreign assistance for a substantial portion of their budgets.
The shutdown of USAID programs is likely to negatively impact America’s relations with several South and Southeast Asian nations. The reduction of USAID programs diminishes American soft power and geopolitical influence, particularly in regions like South Asia and Southeast Asia, where China is winning more hearts than ever. Such announcement may allow China and Russia to expand their influence through their capacity-building, infrastructure building and outreach drives. Without continued support, key initiatives aimed at building self-reliance and sustainable growth may collapse. This could prolong cycles of poverty and instability in the region. Populations already facing crises—such as those displaced by conflict or natural disasters—are at heightened risk without ongoing support from USAID. Cuts to maternal health programs and childhood immunizations could lead to increased mortality rates among mothers and children in these regions. According to the International Narcotics Control Board’s 2023 report, South Asia is home to about 39% of the world’s opiate users.
The agency does a lot in Southeast Asia, a region combatting a host of hitting issues. Last year, the USAID spent about $860 million in the region, helping the nations like Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. The most of the amount was paid for healthcare, growing the economy, education, and government programmes.
In the Southeast, the agency’s programme is also for support small businesses and farming. This is important for poor countries like Cambodia and Laos. They need help from other countries to keep their economy going. If these programs ceased, more people could get sick and more children remain unskilled and uneducated. Trump’s worldview is reflected in his policies. Trump’s America is obviously not that of President Kennedy. Nor the momentum of multipolarity is similar to that of the Cold War that hatched the USAID. Civil society across the South Asia, as seen in nation like Sri Lanka, needs to be more proactive in dealing with compelling challenges in the homeland. A nationalistic policy for self-supporting development budget and more comraderies within the fraternity will be trending.
This is the momentum for the BRICS nations like India, China, Russia, as well as minerals-rich Middle Eastern economies, to step into the funding vacuum left by the US. The limitation of USAID not only jeopardizes immediate humanitarian assistance but further threatens the long-term developmental prospects of several nations in South and South East Asia as well as the rest of the world. However, the USAID remains a tiny share in the US state budget. As the regions grapple with the consequences of reduced aid, it becomes increasingly apparent that such policies can have far-reaching effects that extend well beyond their borders. Addressing these challenges requires a reevaluation of the US foreign aid priorities to ensure that they align with both humanitarian needs as well as strategic interests. Ultimately, the reduction in USAID funding signifies a pivotal moment for BRICS nations and regional partners to assume greater responsibility in the era of multipolarity.
[ Ayanangsha Maitra is a Journalist and New Delhi based Fellow at COGGS. ]
USAID Cut Widens Multipolarity in South, East Asia? Read Post »
ASEAN in Addressing Drug Trafficking in the Golden Triangle Region
Muhammad Indrawan Jatmika
Adrian Naufal Rizqullah
Drug trafficking is a significant threat that has garnered substantial attention in Southeast Asia. Classified as a form of transnational crime, drug trafficking poses a severe threat to international security and stability (Anggraini, 2016). The issue of Illicit drug trade has been a long-standing problem in Southeast Asia, making it one of the regions most affected by this global challenge.
Central to this issue is the Golden Triangle, a region recognized as a major hub for drug production and trafficking. The Golden Triangle spans parts of Eastern Myanmar, Northern Thailand, and Western Laos, making it a focal point for the cultivation, production, and distribution of opium on a global scale. During the 1970s and 1980s, this region emerged as the world’s largest opium producer (Anggraini, 2016). The Golden Triangle remains one of the largest narcotics-producing regions globally, contributing approximately 60% of the world’s opium and heroin supply (BNN, 2018). International drug cartels and syndicates, with extensive networks in Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, facilitate the thriving drug trade in this region.
These networks are instrumental in smuggling narcotics into Southeast Asia through the Golden Triangle, further establishing the region not only as a production hub but also as a strategic transit route for drug trafficking (Othman, 2004). Weak border controls in Myanmar, Thailand, and Laos, the countries comprising the Golden Triangle, exacerbate transnational crime. This lack of effective oversight has been exploited by non-state actors, who pose significant threats to regional security. These actors use the Golden Triangle to traffic narcotics to other Southeast Asian nations. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Southeast Asia’s narcotics trade is one of the busiest globally, rivaling the Golden Crescent region (comprising Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran) in the Middle East (Yanuarizki, 2016).
Beyond its role as a trafficking route, the Golden Triangle is a major opium producer and cultivator (Yanuarizki, 2016). Myanmar, Thailand, and Laos are the primary contributors to drug production in Southeast Asia. Local farmers in northern and western Laos extensively cultivate opium, primarily for regional distribution. Due to its strategic location, Thailand often serves as the initial destination for drugs transported from Myanmar and Laos before being distributed to other areas. Beyond opium, the Golden Triangle is also known to produce various narcotics, including methamphetamine, amphetamine, heroin, kratom, and marijuana (Anggraini, 2016). The repercussions of drug trafficking extend beyond the borders of the Golden Triangle, impacting other countries across Southeast Asia. This issue demands the attention of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a regional organization that has taken an active role in addressing transnational crime, including drug trafficking (Anggraini, 2016). Many Southeast Asian countries are characterized by weak governmental institutions, which contribute to the prevalence of transnational crimes, including drug trafficking. The rapid evolution and increasing scale of the drug trade necessitate immediate and coordinated responses from ASEAN as a regional organization. ASEAN has actively facilitated collaboration among Myanmar, Thailand, and Laos to address these challenges (Aryani & Leksono, 2017). Furthermore, the organization has consistently encouraged its member states to take proactive measures to combat transnational crime and drug trafficking. This study aims to analyze the developments in addressing drug trafficking issues in Southeast Asia, particularly within the Golden Triangle, from 2018 to 2020, with a focus on the role of ASEAN as a regional organization. Specifically, it explores ASEAN’s institutional responses and collaborative frameworks in tackling the drug trade in this region. By examining ASEAN’s work programs and initiatives, this study builds upon prior research to provide a comprehensive understanding of ASEAN’s role as a facilitator and motivator in the fight against drug trafficking in the Golden Triangle.
[ An excerpt from COGGS Impact paper, published by COGGS in collaboration with Department of International Relations, UPN “Veteran” Jawa Timur University, Indonesia]
Authors:
*Muhammad Indrawan Jatmika, Asisstant Professor, International Relations DepartmentUniversitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jawa Timur
**Adrian Naufal Rizqullah Student, International Relations Department, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jawa Timur
ASEAN in Addressing Drug Trafficking in the Golden Triangle Region Read Post »
How Europe is Reframing WWII
- Jean-Pierre Page
WESTERN EUROPEAN VIEWS on the Second World War and the painful past have evolved significantly. Today its interpretation is at the heart of national and international political contentions. The Conservative Revolution of the 1980s saw a depoliticisation of history, reversing the post-war trend to understand history from the perspective of the dominated, notably under the impetus of social and political struggles and the decolonisation movement. Today, history has become the domain of the media, cultural industry and public authorities, and the analysis propagated is not restricted to a shared concern for independent and non-partisan historical research, but instrumentalised to legitimise neoliberalism and US hegemony as the sole horizon of history, the only alternative.
However, the world is changing, and changing fast. It is not Francis Fukuyama’s end of history. The international balance of power has altered dramatically, and the contradictions have become more acute. The end of the Second World War and the defeat of fascism ushered in a new period of history. Anti-fascism gave way to anti-Communism. The Cold War that followed, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the disappearance of the Soviet Union were decisive events that had political, economic, and military consequences, particularly for Europe. The abolition of existing borders and Western aggrandisement with NATO expansion raised crucial issues related to collective security, state sovereignty and high-risk conflicts.
The global context is marked by a US-led unipolar world order facing a systemic crisis, including one posing an existential threat to European institutions. As we see from the war in Ukraine, sovereignty is the main obstacle to the preservation of the established order. The West and the political and economic model that it represents is in decline, highlighted by the revival of Russia, the undeniable rise of China on the world stage, and the emergence of anti-hegemonic alliances. Western bids to counter this decline at whatever cost, preserve US hegemony, and give legitimacy to its actions are at the origin of the political and ideological efforts to impose a different understanding and interpretation of history, resulting in its manipulation and the propagation of fables and untruths .
This re-writing of history has to do with Washington’s agenda to impose on the rest of the world a new system of ‘global governance,’ a nebulous ‘rules-based order,’ founded on US supremacy and unilateralism. Rooted in the ideology of American Exceptionalism and Manifest Destiny, it denigrates alternative cultures as inferior and unworthy, dividing the world into superior and inferior, civilized and uncivilized, liberal and illiberal, good and bad. It has now been conceptualised in terms of ‘democracy versus autocracy’ and wielded as a weapon in Washington’s bloc politics and bloc confrontation, subverting the UN Charter-based multilateral system founded on respect for the sovereign equality of States and the right of peoples to self-determination.
And it is toward this end that all the world’s media, so-called experts, complacent academics, NGOs, and think-tanks that the United States can rely upon are being mobilized. In unison, they rattle off the same argument: “Russia is at our doorstep implementing a Machiavellian plan to dominate Europe, the earth, and also the stars!” Why not the entire universe, one may ask ? For the cause, China is thrown in, identified with Russia, and the emphasis is made how complementary their strategies are. Under threat of being accused of complicity with Vladimir Putin, any challenge to this new doxa is prohibited !
Recently a US media outlet proclaimed that it had been US troops that liberated Auschwitz, before retracting and apologizing for the error. In one of its first surveys, France’s oldest polling institute, IFOP, posed the following question at the end of the Second World War, repeating it 70 years later: “Which nation do you think contributed most to the defeat of Germany in 1945? Great Britain, the United States, or the USSR?” At the end of the War, over 60% of French responded it was Russia. Only 20% said it was the United States, and 12% the United Kingdom. Seventy years later, in a reversal of opinion, 58% believed it was the United States that had played the main role in Germany’s defeat.
It is to serve this hegemonic project that, in 1986, the gigantic Caen Memorial Museum in France was created with substantial US funding, as part of the International Network of Museums for Peace. It was dedicated to the history of the 20th century and to peace and given a special role to rewrite history. It contains gross historical errors. In 2002, several exhibition halls were added, devoted to the Cold War, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the Holocaust, highlighting only the role of the United States in the Normandy Landing as late as 6 June 1944.No mention is made of the head of the Soviet Union Joseph Stalin as having officially first raised the question of opening a second front three years earlier, on 18 July 1941.
In the same spirit, in September 2019, the European Parliament voted a resolution stigmatising Nazism and Communism alike, claiming that the second world war had been triggered by the German-Soviet Pact: “… 80 years ago on 23 August 1939, the communist Soviet Union and Nazi Germany signed a Treaty of Non-Aggression, known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact … which paved the way for the outbreak of the Second World War”.
By reducing the origins of the Second World War to the “German-Soviet Pact,” the resolution places both Nazi Germany and the USSR on equal footing, considering both responsible, despite no serious historian, with a few rare exceptions, ever having questioned the aggressors as Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and imperial Japan. By supporting the text, the European parliamentarians disavow the conclusions of the Nuremberg Tribunal, equating those who built the Auschwitz extermination camp with the Red Army that liberated the survivors.
Was it not the Nobel laureate for literature, Thomas Mann, who once wrote: “To place Russian communism on the same moral level with Nazi fascism, because both are totalitarian, is, at best, superficial, in the worse case it is fascism.”?
The European Parliament has thus conferred legitimacy on a vision of history that has to do with pure propaganda, one that is silent on the policy of appeasement and the complicity of the ruling classes of most Western countries with Hitler’s Germany. Hence, its failure to mention the Munich Agreement, the Anschluss, or the period of collaboration between, for instance, Nazi Germany and Pétain’s France and the latter’s zealous roundups of Jews. The Vel d’Hiv roundup in Paris on16 and 17 July 1942 was the ordeal of 13,000 men, women, old people and children deported to the gas chambers of the extermination camps, including Auschwitz. They were among the 75,000 Jews in France who suffered the same fate.
A tragic history that demands decency and humility has today given rise to a dishonest amalgam between the Holocaust, anti-Semitism, the events of October 7, Gaza and the Palestinian struggle. It is as if, in a distorted logic, Palestinians are at the root of a resurgence of anti-Semitism associated with the Nazis and Auschwitz. Establishing such a link with a struggle of a people for self-determination and decolonization is intolerable and unacceptable. It must not be forgotten that the establishment of the Jewish state on Palestinian land is the result of a link made by Western powers between Palestine and the problem of Jewish refugees in Europe, victims not of Arab, but of European anti-Semitism, with its ultimate expression in Nazi extermination camps.
The hypocritical rhetoric accompanying the exercise of re-writing history ironically disqualifies the very liberal order that its authors seek to preserve. “Make America great again,” “rebirth of the Germanic spirit,” or “civilizing mission of colonization,” which some Western politicians claim as their right, only serve as diversion from their own culpability for plunder, slavery, devastation, predation, and genocide.
The European Parliament’s resolution actively participates in the erasure of all traces of history. It legitimises the renaming of streets, the nostalgic neo-Nazi demonstrations, and the destruction of historical monuments celebrating the Red Army’s contribution to the victory over fascism, as in the Baltic states or in Ukraine. And all the while, it disregards the heroic patriotic and partisan struggles in all of Europe.
On 17 January 2024, the European Parliament engaged in yet another exercise on the past, adopting a new resolution that no longer contents itself with a call to rewrite history, but a call to erase all traces and create “a new shared culture of remembrance”. Member States are, for instance, called upon to update their existing curricula and teaching methods so that European history takes precedence over national history in order, we are told, to challenge the stereotypes and “sacred cows” of national histories.
It is hardly surprising that critical thinking is being replaced by slogans and emotional narratives, simplifying facts and impoverishing public debate. Society is being restricted in its ability to analyse its own past, its complexities and contradictions with all their nuances. The rise of revisionist narratives and “alternative truths” bears witness to the devaluation of rigorous historical analysis, eroding the legitimacy of academic, scientific and educational institutions, weakening them and compromising their essential role as guardians of history.
This simplification and instrumentalisation of history has devastating effects as once unifying symbols become subjects of discord. We are warned of the dangers ahead and alerted to our responsibility toward the younger and future generations to lead this struggle for History with a capital ‘H’.
[ This article was originally published by the Valdai Discussion Club under the title ‘How Europe Is Rewriting WWII History.’ COGGS is republishing it with an edited title. The author, Jean-Pierre Page, is a French writer and trade union activist.]
How Europe is Reframing WWII Read Post »
The Falcon and Bear Braving a Storm: UAE and Russia in the Dawn of Multipolarity
- Ayanangsha Maitra
Russia, THE TSAR of diamond mining, and the UAE, where the raw brilliance is honed into luxury, share a warm economic relationship and the pair contribute immensely in the grand design of the geoeconomics. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s state visit to Qasr Al Shati in Abu Dhabi, following the Munich Security Conference signifies the Emirate’s growing role as a mediator in global diplomacy. It also shows the trust Abu Dhabi commands from both Moscow and Kyiv in advancing peacemaking efforts.
Moscow’s policy to diversify trade from the West to Asia has benefited the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Trade between Russia and the United Arab Emirates tripled over the last three years, remarked President Vladimir Putin when he hosted UAE ruler Sheikh Mohammed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Moscow in October 2024, followed by a meeting at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence. The bilateral trade between the two burgeoning economies crossed $11.4 billion in 2023, redefining the relations between the two nations.
The UAE has joined the BRICS as a full member in January 2024. Against the backdrop of seismic geo-politics as well as geo-economics shift, several factors have altered the trajectories of Moscow and Abu Dhabi, shaping their destiny. Since the war in Ukraine began in February 2022, the UAE has experienced greater economic success as Moscow has diversified its trade strategy from the West to Asia. In the UAE, Russia exports transport items and IT in addition to the energy. On the other hand, the UAE exports products such as shisha tobacco, broadcasting equipment and selected aviation parts to Russia. The UAE is not only the largest trading partner of Russia but receives about 90 percent of Moscow’s total investment in the gulf region. The UAE supplies butter, machinery, nuclear reactors, boilers, and vehicles.
![[UAE ruler Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Russia's President Vladimir Putin. Illustration: COGGS]](https://i0.wp.com/thegeoeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Home-1.jpg?resize=653%2C367&ssl=1)
infrastructure to facilitate trade. The Ministry of Finance of the UAE, has concluded the negotiations for Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement on income and capital with Russia. The UAE and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) have concluded final round of negotiations to form a comprehensive economic partnership agreement to enhance bilateral trade in goods between the UAE and the five members of the EAEU bloc, comprising Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Russia. Russian President Vladimir Putin paid a one-day lightning tour to Abu Dhabi in December 2023 during COP28 climate talks.
The state visit of UAE ruler Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan to Russia in October 2024 warmed up the Moscow-Abu Dhabi relations, which encompass diverse sectors, including energy, trade, space exploration, and humanitarian cooperation. Additionally, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the 7th Russia-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Ministerial Meeting for Strategic Dialogue in September 2024, along with his visits to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates and engagement with the League of Arab States (LAS), played a significant role in strengthening ties with the Arab states. The Russia-Arab bonhomie was rekindled in the meeting of the Russia-Islamic World Strategic Vision Group at Kazan Forum 2024 in May.
The UAE: A Magnet for Russian Expats
The UAE has emerged as a dream destination for Russians for plethora of factors. The cities like Dubai and Abu Dhabi offer a seamless blend of accessibility, convenience, and an elevated lifestyle at a reasonable cost. With direct flights ferrying between multiple cities, streamlined visa policies, and the ease of securing a Dubai residence permit (Dubai ID) and banking facilities, relocation is convenient. However, securing visas for the US and Europe remains a formidable challenge, placing the UAE as an appealing alternative. Dubai, in particular, promises a sophisticated standard of living, featuring upscale residences, prestigious schools, a dynamic culinary scene, and an exclusive social environment for affluent Russian-speaking expatriates. The presence of a well-established Russian-speaking community—estimated at 100,000 as of 2019, comprising 40,000 Russian nationals and 60,000 individuals from former Soviet states—creates a sense of familiarity and belonging. Additionally, the influx of Russian tourists continues to grow, with flights connecting various Russian regions to key UAE destinations such as Sharjah, Ras Al Khaimah, Fujairah, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi.
Economic Relations
Economic ties are one of the key determinants of UAE–Russia relations. The two nations have come forward mostly over the decades from the relations of ecommerce. The UAE is playing a role in facilitating parallel imports into Russia, with a significant increase in exports of electronics, spare parts, and microchips from the Emirates to Russia. However, despite this increase in trade, the UAE is under constant pressure from the West to limit its cooperation with Russia. The financial institutions of the Emirate are exercising caution in their dealings with Russian entities because they are closely followed by US regulators. The UAE was included in the “grey list” of the Financial Action Task Force, prompting increased oversight of cash flows, making it more difficult to transfer assets from Russia or bypass sanctions.
From the late 1990s onward, Moscow has progressively solidified its partnership with the Arab nation, resulting in a marked surge in Russian exports to the Emirates. Concurrently, a mushrooming Russian diaspora has emerged in the urban habitats like Dubai and Abu Dhabi. The Russian community, comprising business professionals, skilled laborers, and entrepreneurs is cajoled by the appealing economic nature and abundant investment opportunities these cities offer.
The UAE and the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) established diplomatic ties shortly after the UAE’s formation in December 1971. A USSR delegation visited the UAE in January 1972, acceding to establish diplomatic missions at the ambassador level. Despite the early agreement, the actual establishment of embassies was delayed until November 1985, when Moscow and Abu Dhabi officially announced bilateral relations. The USSR opened its diplomatic mission in March 1986, with the UAE Embassy opening in Moscow in April 1987. The missions provided a significant boost to bilateral ties, particularly in the economic sphere.
Economic Cooperation and Trade
- Early Financial Agreements: In April 1988, Moscow received a loan of $50 million from the UAE, marking early economic cooperation. In December 1989, the Russian Foreign Bank visited Abu Dhabi to explore additional borrowing opportunities and the participation of UAE financial institutions in issuing Soviet financial credit instruments.
- Air and Sea Transport: An Air Transport Agreement was signed in 1987. Notably, Aeroflot had an office in Abu Dhabi since 1979. Later in 1988, several Soviet sea carriers inked deals with the UAE company Sharaf Shipping.
- Trade and Industrial Cooperation: An Agreement on Trade, Economic, and Industrial Cooperation was signed in Moscow in January 1990, further strengthening economic ties.
Trade Relationship
Deliveries of electronic items and spare parts for them from the Emirates to Russia have grown significantly to become the country’s biggest category of exports to Russia, while deliveries of microchips soared 15 times. In the 2022, the UAE sold Russia 158 civilian drones. The bilateral trade between Russia and UAE crossed $11.4 billion (1 trillion rubles) in 2023. In 2022, Russia exported $8.07 billion to the UAE, while the UAE exported $2.47 billion to Russia, indicating a significant trade surplus in favour of Russia. Russia’s main exports to the UAE in 2022 were gold ($5.36 billion), diamonds ($1.64 billion), and refined petroleum ($214 million). The UAE’s main exports to Russia in 2022 included broadcasting equipment ($1.4 billion), computers ($244 million), and microphones and headphones ($71.8 million).
Despite the difficulties faced by Russia in the 1990s after the dissolution of the USSR, the warm relations between the two nations were maintained and gradually developed, with rapid growth occurring in the first decade of the 21st century. Since the start of the war in Ukraine in February 2022, Dubai has become an increasingly important hub for trade with Russia. This has been aided by Western sanctions on Russian energy products which have led to an exodus of oil and commodity traders from London and Geneva to Dubai.
The UAE-Russia relationship has evolved from its early diplomatic foundations to a significant partnership characterised by robust trade and economic cooperation. The increasing volume of trade, coupled with continuous high-level diplomatic engagement, highlights the importance of this relationship for both nations. The establishment of Dubai as a key trading hub post-2022 further demonstrates the adaptability and growing significance of this bilateral relationship in the current scenario.
In 2023, Russia exported 902,000 tonnes of agricultural products to the UAE, marking a 2.8-fold increase from the previous year. According to Agroexport, Russia has steadily expanded its wheat shipments to the UAE, with exports surpassing 900,000 tonnes in the 2019/20 agricultural year—accounting for 50% of the UAE’s total wheat imports. Andrei Terekhin, Russia’s trade representative in the UAE, highlighted the Emirate’s market as a promising destination for a diverse range of agricultural products.
Several prestigious Russian universities have established a presence in the UAE. Russian companies have showed enormous interest in the UAE across sectors and about 4000 Russian companies are functional in the UAE. Russian enterprises like Rosneft, Metalloinvest, Volga-Dnieper, Kurganmashzavod, Amtel, Stroitransgaz, Metallurgical Pipe Company, Interkomholding, Alrosa, KAMAZ, Lukoil, VTB Capital, and several others not just created their footmarks but also earned name as a respected corporation. UAE’s logistics major DP World, signed a strategic cooperation deal with Rosatom State Corporation, to establish an international logistics joint venture (JV) to develop container shipping through the Arctic and operate in the Russian and international markets. The Russia-UAE Working Group for Regional and Investment Cooperation conducts their meeting time to time. The enterprises from the two nations formed Russia-Emirates Business Council in September 2005.
Conclusion:
The Emirate’s prestige, prosperity and tax-friendly policies make it an attractive gateway for businesses looking to engage with Russia, particularly as trade routes and partnerships shift in the current geopolitical landscape. The UAE’s business-friendly approach allows Russian companies, making it a significant bridge for trade and commerce.
The UAE’s warming ties with Russia and intuitive move to be a member of BRICS a clear move towards supporting multipolarity – while simultaneously maintaining a business diversification strategy. The Emirates’ role in facilitating parallel imports into Russia highlights its function in circumventing Western sanctions and enabling continued trade relations. This is further supported by the increase in exports of electronics, spare parts, and microchips from the UAE to Russia. The UAE provides an excellent opportunity for several other countries to access the Russian market. By establishing itself as a major trading hub, the UAE facilitates the flow of goods and services between various other nations in addition to Russia. The presence of a growing Russian community in the UAE creates a conducive environment for business, further promoting trade and investment. In essence, the UAE’s actions show a dual commitment to both strategic diversification and enabling multipolarity.
[ Ayanangsha Maitra, PhD is a writer and producer at COGGS. He can be contacted via @Ayanangsha on X or via email : ayan@thegeoeconomics.com . ]
The Falcon and Bear Braving a Storm: UAE and Russia in the Dawn of Multipolarity Read Post »
BRICS: Not Dead, But Thriving
Mohammed Saqib
IN HIS RECENT comments, President Donald Trump of the United States of America declared that the BRICS bloc—currently comprising Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates—was created with a “bad purpose” and that it is, in effect, already “dead.” Even more dramatically, he – before assuming his second term threatened a 100% tariff on any sort of trading activity involving the BRICS nations if they attempted to de-dollarize commerce.
![[ Courtesy: TASS News Agency]](https://i0.wp.com/thegeoeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-18-at-12.36.05-AM.png?resize=388%2C270&ssl=1)
President Trump’s remarks on BRICS may appeal to nationalist sentiments. Despite his claims that BRICS is irrelevant or “dead,” the bloc is a formidable global economic force. The interest of countries to join the bloc makes it more practical and a powerful entity to claim the multipolarity. Representing over 3.24 billion people—more than 40% of the world’s population—BRICS nations wield demographic influence on an unprecedented scale. Economically, the bloc contributes approximately $26.03 trillion to global GDP, accounting for 26% of the world’s total GDP. Their impact on international trade is equally significant, with BRICS countries are responsible for 20% of global exports and 18% of global imports. Beyond these metrics, the New Development Bank (NDB), established by the bloc in 2014, has approved over $33 billion in infrastructure and sustainable development projects. Far from being defunct, the economic weight of BRICS continues to shape the trajectory of regional as well as global development.
Misunderstanding BRICS’ Purpose and Potential
The perception that BRICS was established for a “bad purpose” fails to recognise the bloc’s core objective: providing a collaborative platform for emerging economies to enhance their voice at the global level. It seeks to address and rectify longstanding economic disparities. Initiatives like the New Development Bank (NDB) signify its dedication to promoting sustainable development and addressing infrastructure needs—goals that starkly contrast with any notion of a “bad purpose.” Moreover, rather than being dismissed, BRICS continues to flourish, attracting interest from numerous nations eager to join a framework that fosters multipolarity. The claim that “most people don’t want it” is unfounded and overlooks the increasing demand for a more diversified global financial landscape. Over 30 countries, including Turkey, a NATO member, have applied to join BRICS or its economic bloc.
Threat of a 100% Tariff
Perhaps the most alarming element of Trump’s comments is the threat of imposing a 100% tariff on any BRICS nation’s trading activities if it dared entertain policies aimed at de-dollarizing global commerce. It may sound like rhetoric, but such a move would have far-reaching consequences if implemented. The BRICS nations hold significant value in the age of multipolarity. China, a leading member of the bloc, is a manufacturing titan and the US’s largest trading partner, accounting for approximately $600 billion in bilateral trade in 2024, with critical imports like electronics as well as machinery underpinning American supply chains. Similarly, India is one of the fastest-growing economies. Consider the examples of other members. India’s burgeoning trade relationship with the US is driven by key sectors such as technology, pharmaceuticals, and services. Brazil, the US’s second-largest trading partner in Latin America, supplies essential commodities like soybeans and crude oil. While trade with Russia has decreased due to sanctions, its energy export capacity remains significant. South Africa offers vital minerals and metals necessary for US manufacturing and technology. A blanket tariff would complicate economic ties and affect bilateral relations. As a result, American businesses and consumers may have to pay higher costs. Such tariff measures may invite potential retaliatory actions that could ripple across global supply chains and further exacerbate global economic instability.
The emphasis on “playing games with the dollar” reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of why certain BRICS members are advocating for de-dollarized trade. These measures are not primarily aimed at undermining the US dollar; rather, they focus on reducing external vulnerabilities to sanctions and market volatility. Diversifying currency use is a pragmatic strategy in an unpredictable global economy, not an antagonistic action deserving of punitive tariffs. The global financial architecture is witnessing a slow shift as BRICS nations pursue the use of other means for international transactions along with the dollar. This movement manifests in three key developments: the increasing adoption of local currency settlements, exemplified by India and Russia’s rupee-ruble oil trade arrangements; the advancement of central bank digital currencies, with China’s digital yuan reaching 260 million users in its pilot phase; and discussions at the 2023 BRICS Summit regarding the creation of a shared currency for inter-BRICS trade. These efforts represent an economic diversification strategy aimed at reducing dollar dependency. At the same time it creates greater financial autonomy among BRICS nations rather than a direct challenge to the dollar’s international role. The trend reflects a broader evolution in global finance, where emerging economies seek to build resilient payment systems that can withstand geopolitical pressures while maintaining stable trade relationships.
Need for a Constructive Engagement
Ultimately, in true Trumpism style, the hyperbolic rhetoric surrounding the state of BRICS appears designed more for political theatrics than for a genuine analysis of global economic strategies. Instead of dismissively threatening an entire coalition of nations, a more productive approach would involve engaging in dialogue and developing mutually beneficial economic frameworks.
The BRICS bloc is an evolving testament to the shifting dynamics of global power. While the United States remains a dominant economic player, its influence is increasingly challenged by a world where trade, technology, and geopolitical alliances are as fluid as they are interconnected. Threats of tariffs and isolation may create temporary pressure, but they are unlikely to dismantle a bloc that is built on shared interests and growing interdependence. Rather than instilling fear through tariffs and empty threats, a future-oriented strategy would recognise the benefits of inclusive dialogue — one that respects multiple voices in the international arena.
The reality is that BRICS is not dead. In fact it’s an evolving bloc that reflects the aspirations of the Global South to have a greater voice in global affairs.
[ Mohammed Saqib is an economist and Convenor of COGGS. ]
BRICS: Not Dead, But Thriving Read Post »
DeepSeek: A Legacy of Confucian China
Atul Aneja
THE STUNNING SUCCESS of the Chinese AI chatbot DeepSeek has left the US-led tech universe shell-shocked, fearful, and demoralised. That is not surprising. The arrogant rulers of the cyber-universe headquartered in such places as the Silicon Valley have long believed in the myth that they have the divine right to lead the global tech industry. To find young upstarts from lowly Hangzhou shattering the myth that they have been born to command cyber-space in perpetuity, is, indeed, hard to swallow.
But had the tech-titans in the West been humbler and avoided living in a self-created bubble, they would perhaps have by-passed their terrifying deer-in-the-headlights situation. So how did China achieve its Sputnik moment that has delivered such a shattering psychological blow to the high-browed collective west?
There are at least three underlying drivers that explain why the tireless neo-Confucian techies from China, made such a big splash on the hi-tech canvass by training an advanced AI chatbot at a miserly cost $5.58 million. This has hugely embarrassed the ruling tech priestly class that has pumped far larger sums to produce, from a user’s perspective, only similar products.
First, clear-eyed leaders of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have diligently painted the big picture, detailing the time-lines for China’s rise, in which developers of AI have a pivotal, clearly defined role. The rise of AI, the key to cutting-edge Industry 4.0 that was already in focus—received a big boost in 2017 during 19th congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC). At the end of the congress, which is routinely held every five years, Chinese President Xi Jinping, delivered a seminal speech. In his marathon address, which lasted more than three hours, Xi laid out China’s grand strategy. From the ornate Great Hall of the People, the Chinese leader declared the country’s two centenary goals.
He unambiguously announced that his country’s first goal would be to eradicate absolute poverty by 2021—the year that marked the centenary of the formation in Shanghai of the CPC. That goal has already been achieved with the doubling in one decade of the Chinese GDP from its 2010 base. The second goal was even more consequential. Xi made it plain that in 2049—the year marking 100 years of the formation of the PRC—China would become a world leader, acing all spheres of human endeavour. With that the people of the country would realise their “Chinese dream.”
In order to achieve these jaw-dropping goals, the Chinese had already packed the required feedstock, including AI. During their 14th five-year plan that would end this year, Chinese planners had identified the critical role of digital economy, focusing on core industries such as big data, blockchain and AI to propel China’s digital advance.
Regarding AI, the plan focused on developing advanced algorithms, visible in the DeepSeek model, and their application in industrial manufacturing, fintech and healthcare. It also lasered on integrating AI with quantum computing. This was done with the intent of beefing computational power that was required to solve complex problems quickly. Chinese planners saw a major AI role for establishing smart cities, digital villages, improving public services and living standards of the people.
Second, the Chinese began their long march to establish a hi-tech culture and eco-system that was original, innovative, and geared to guarantee success. Here it is important to grasp the Chinese drill for developing digital technologies, including AI.
In an in insightful article that appeared in the South China Morning Post, economist Kok How Lee points to three key drivers of China’s ever- growing success.
He points out that China has leveraged its vast domestic market to achieve economies of scale, leading to inexpensive production of goods, without compromising quality. Riding on a 1.4 billion population, China has a vast consumer base allowing businesses to scale up production—a situation that other markets will find hard to replicate.
Citing the smartphone industry, Lee spotlights Chinese brands such as Huawei Technologies, Xiaomi, Oppo and Vivo. These companies focused on meeting the needs of the massive domestic market before expanding globally. “This ability to scale up domestically first provides a critical edge over international counterparts who operate in smaller markets,” Lee observes.
The article further nails China’s “user-centric” approach as a key driver for on-your-feet innovation. It points out that Chinese companies are very sensitive to user feedback, and channel it rapidly into improved products. Copious data on consumer behaviour and preferences drawn from China’s vast market, gives Chinese companies the fire power to innovate and improve products.
Finally fierce domestic competition in advanced areas, including AI has been driving breakneck innovation across China, taking the world by storm. For instance, unlike Europe, cut-throat competition for market share among electric car brands-BYD, Nio, Li Auto and Xpeng –is driving down costs and improving product quality.
“This relentless drive to outdo competitors has fostered a culture of innovation that permeates China’s tech ecosystem,” says Lee.
Third, the post-Covid situation, marked by sharper geopolitical hostility from the West, coupled with the domestic economic slowdown, significantly driven by sluggishness in traditional economy drivers including real estate and infrastructure, has forced China to seek new motors for economic success, including AI. Recently, China’s leaders exhorted industry heads to focus on the country’s tech sector in the search for new drivers of economic growth. President Xi, in a meeting, himself called for “high-level technological self-reliance and improvement” and “sound development momentum” in 2025—the years when the 14th five-year plan runs its course.
Xi authorised the business chamber All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce, to steer the private sector towards greater entrepreneurship and boosting their confidence. In order to power digital innovation, China has chosen Hangzhou, the ground-zero from where DeepSeek took wings, as a key destination of AI advancement.
Why Hangzhou?
There are several reasons for nailing Hangzhou as an AI hub. First and foremost, Hangzhou has abundant talent pool. The city can leverage several research institutions, including Zhejiang University, which has taken a head-start in AI research since 1978. The city has over 7,000 people working in the AI industry—a talent pool that naturally draws AI investors. Hangzhou has become a digital favourite also because of its tradition of local government support, exemplified by the establishment of the 5G Innovation Park there. Today, it hosts the China Artificial Intelligence Town– a dedicated area within Hangzhou Future Sci-Tech City, focusing on big data, cloud computing, IoT, and chip design. In fact, Hangzhou has designated four districts – Yuhang, Xiaoshan, Binjiang, and Xihu – as pilot areas for AI development, leveraging their resources and expertise.
Besides, the presence of Ali Baba, the e-commerce giant, has vastly added to Hangzhou’s glamour and allure, majorly reinforcing the city’s AI ecosystem. Alibaba’s initiatives include ET Brain, which has several applications in various fields such as healthcare and fintech.
Unsurprisingly, attracted by its strong AI infrastructure and digital culture, Hangzhou, besides DeepSeek, is home to companies like Rongyi.Big, Intellifusion, CloudWalk Technology, and Terminus Technologies. These firms are undertaking cutting edge research to benefit AI applications for e-commerce, video analytics, smart city solutions, and IoT integration. Other digital icons in Hangzhou include robotic dog maker Unitree and Game Science, which has become famous after developing Black Myth: Wukong, an AAA video game.
It is important to understand the Chinese success can be significantly attributed to its strong rootedness to its traditional Confucian work ethic. This includes respect and advocacy for hard work and diligence based on the belief that persistent effort and continuous improvement yield desirable results. Respect for authority and hierarchy is another strong attribute of the Confucian culture. Distilled at the workplace, it means showing respect to seniors and supervisors.
The Confucian ethic also places a premium on group harmony and cooperation. Teamwork and collaboration to achieve collective goals is of higher value than individual triumphs. Besides life-long learning and self-improvement is encouraged, which means relentless pursuit of knowledge, skill development and professional growth in the workplace.
[Atul Aneja is an advisor to COGGS. The article is republished from katehon.com. The views expressed in this article are solely his own.]
DeepSeek: A Legacy of Confucian China Read Post »