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 Policies are announced, held and withdrawn by the hour.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. ]
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.
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 TheNew 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.
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]
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.
[ 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]
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.
President Ronald Reagan and Scot M. Faulkner. Photo shared with Ayanangsha Maitra.
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.
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. ]
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
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.]
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]With Russia’s diamond sector largely controlled by state-supported Alrosa, the sanctions imposed by the Western nations have made it harder to access traditional markets. The UAE has stepped in as a key intermediary, leveraging its tax-friendly policies and advanced
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.
[BRICS KAZAN FORUM 2024 Celebrating Modest Fashion Day, representing Russian and Gulf Models. Courtesy: RIA Media Bank]
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.
[ Rosoboronexport, state-owned defence firm of Russia maintained a business-as-usual composure. Courtesy: Sputnik]The conflict in Ukraine was a shock to the market. The UAE, as part of OPEC+, has been struggling to bring more investment into oil and gas production. This is a shared challenge within the OPEC+ framework, which includes Russia, and suggests that the countries have a joint mechanism for oil production. The UAE has previously warned of the need for more investment in oil and gas, which was ignored when the world’s attention was focused on renewable energy and environmental issues.
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 . ]
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.
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.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin during an expanded meeting of BRICS leaders during the 16th BRICS summit in Kazan. [Photo: Sergey Bobylev ]De-Dollarization: A Growing Trend
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. ]
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.]
AS THE GULF undergoes lightening-fast transformation, Saudi Arabia stands out as a leading example of change. NEOM, located in Tabuk Province of Saudi, is more than just a real estate venture—it is a visionary megacity project that represents a futuristic economic development initiative aimed at diversifying the Kingdom’s economy. Ideated as the flagship project of Saudi Vision 2030, NEOM is set to play a significant role in the country’s transition from a hydrocarbon-based economic model. Launched in 2017 by Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, this planned arcology spans 26,500 km² at the northern tip of the Red Sea, strategically located east of Egypt and south of Jordan. The name “NEOM” is a portmanteau of the Greek prefix “neo” (new) and the Arabic word Mostaqbal, meaning future.
Key Features and Development Aspects
NEOM’s economic foundation rests on fifteen targeted sectors, including healthcare, financial services, biotech, and advanced manufacturing. The NEOM Green Hydrogen project exemplifies this focus, representing the world’s largest initiative of its kind. The project actively attracts private sector investment, spanning industries from real estate to high-tech manufacturing, with the NEOM Investment Fund also focusing on frontier technologies. As of late January 2025, over $50 billion has been invested in essential infrastructure development, as Rayan Fayez, Deputy CEO of NEOM, mentioned at the World Economic Forum.
The projects’s strategic location, at the gateway to the Suez Canal (facilitating 13% of global trade), combined with abundant solar as well as wind resources, makes it ideally suited to achieve its goal of 100% renewable energy. A competitive regulatory framework is being developed to draw both capital and talent. Currently, over 5,000 people from more than 100 countries are contributing to the initiative. Vertical construction is expected to start soon, with the initial phase covering about 20 million square meters of gross floor area (GFA), reserving 95% of the land as a nature reserve.
Six Distinct Regions of NEOM
NEOM is spread across six regions: two focused on urban development and four centered on tourism and environmental conservation.
Trojena: This mountain resort, rising to 2,900 meters, will host the 2029 Asian Winter Games. It will feature an ecotourism development, including a lake and a village.
Magna: Stretching 100 km along the Gulf of Aqaba, Magna will feature twelve interconnected developments offering residential and tourism experiences, including a mountain-integrated hotel resort.
The Islands: A collection of 41 islands, developed as a tourism destination, with a focus on ecological preservation, particularly coral reef protection in collaboration with UNESCO.
Nature Reserve: Encompassing 95% of NEOM’s land, the reserve will focus on rewilding and introducing new species to foster an immersive natural environment.
Oxagon: This industrial port city, located at the mouth of the Suez Canal, will specialize in green and clean technologies.
The Line: The capital city of NEOM, designed for zero-car mobility and powered by renewable energy. It will feature high-density living in a unique grid framework, with primary decks every 100 meters for traffic and infrastructure.
NEOM functions as a living laboratory, where cutting-edge technologies in mobility, healthcare, and food production are tested and implemented. Advanced construction methods, such as automated rebar caging, are used to optimize efficiency and minimize waste. In addition to its physical infrastructure, NEOM seeks to lead with best-in-class digital services and operating systems, aiming to redefine urban livability, business practices, and conservation efforts. It strives for 100% renewable energy and the preservation of 95% of its land as a nature reserve.
Overcoming Challenges and Looking Ahead
Communicating the scale and complexity of NEOM presents challenges, sometimes sparking skepticism and misinterpretations. The project’s goal is to create a new model of urban development that harmoniously integrates with nature, prioritizing environmental preservation more than traditional cities. Attracting residents will require creating appealing employment opportunities and a desirable lifestyle for both individuals and capital. Multimodal mobility solutions, including rail networks, are under consideration for inter-regional connectivity, with heavy rail for passengers and freight along The Line, as well as autonomous freight systems.
NEOM is pushing the envelope on HealthTech, exploring digital human twins and AI-driven diagnostics, aiming to be at the forefront of healthcare innovation. Though the project is envisioned as a long-term, multi-generational undertaking, significant milestones will be reached in the near future. Its ultimate ambition is to serve as a global model for sustainable urban development and redefine humanity’s interaction with the natural world, all while advancing technology and healthcare.
Expanding its investments across technology, international sports, and infrastructure, including Riyadh’s new metro system, the Kingdom’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) has committed over $500 billion to the development of NEOM. Denis Hickey, Chief Development Officer of NEOM, has outlined a century-long timeline for the project’s development, emphasizing the need to prepare for the projected 9 million residents. Although recent reports suggest a possible recalibration of the scope, especially for The Line’s initial phase, progress continues across other elements of NEOM, including the operational port at Oxagon and the ongoing construction of the Trojena and Magna resorts.
NEOM is being constructed to redefine the relationship between humanity, technology, and the natural world – not just to elevate Saudi’s stature at the global level. As the state-of-the-art project evolves, NEOM holds the potential to be a global exemplar for sustainable urban development, blending advanced technologies with ecological stewardship. While the project’s immense scale and ambition present challenges, its ongoing progress is a testament to Saudi Arabia’s commitment to transforming its economy and establishing a model for the cities of the future. With its focus on renewable energy, groundbreaking healthcare innovations, and a harmonious balance between development and preservation, NEOM could shape the way we envision urban living in the 21st century. Once functional, NEOM will not only transform Saudi Arabia but set a new standard for the world to follow in the quest for sustainable, high-tech cities that prioritize both the environment and human well-being. [COGGS]
The high-octane discussions at the World Economic Forum on January 20-24, 2025 in the Davos, Switzerland have tabled significant challenges facing the European economy, alongside potential pathways for recovery and growth. Here are ten key points that encapsulate the current threats to European economy and proposed solutions.
Stagnant Growth Rates: Europe’s economy is projected to grow at about half the pace of the US from 2019 to 2024. Only 25% of economists surveyed believe Europe will experience “moderate or stronger” growth this year, compared to over half for China and three-quarters for the Middle East and North Africa[1].
Strategic Miscalculations: Jamil Anderlini, editor at Politico, emphasized that Europe made three significant bets that have backfired: dependence on Russia for energy, reliance on China for open markets, and looking to America for security. This has left Europe vulnerable as it navigates a complex geopolitical landscape[1].
Energy Crisis: The continent is grappling with a persistent energy crisis as it seeks alternatives to Russian energy supplies while simultaneously facing long-term dependence on imports from China. This dual challenge complicates Europe’s energy security and economic stability[1][3].
Fragmented Financial System: Contrary to popular belief, Europe’s financial system is not as integrated as it should be. Larry Fink, Chairman and CEO of BlackRock, described Europe as “a beautiful myth,” emphasizing the need for a more cohesive financial framework to create economic resilience[1][2].
Capital Markets Union: A proposed solution is the establishment of an EU capital markets union. This drive aims to better allocate funds to young, innovative companies, thereby retaining domestic entrepreneurs and attracting foreign talent[2][4].
Leadership Acknowledgment: Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, noted that decision-makers are aware of the necessary steps forward. The creation of a capital markets union is crucial for enhancing investment opportunities across Europe[1][2].
Cultural Confidence Gap: IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva pointed out that Europe suffers from a “culture of modesty,” in contrast to the US’s “culture of confidence.” There is a pressing need to build greater confidence in European markets and industries to stimulate growth[1][2].
Leveraging Cultural Heritage: Europe can capitalize on its historical strengths, including its values and cultural heritage, as exemplified by figures like Beethoven and Kant. This cultural capital can serve as a foundation for promoting liberal democracies and attracting global talent[1][3].
Emerging Economic Opportunities: As the US potentially shifts its focus away from selected growth sectors, particularly clean energy production, Europe stands ready to seize these opportunities. Lagarde indicated that if the US does not pursue this growth, Europe would welcome it with open arms[1][4].
Strategic Recommendations from Davos: Leaders assembled at Davos proposed several strategies for Europe to regain its competitive edge, including enhancing green energy initiatives, improving investment environments, and creating strategic interdependence among nations[1][4].
At the WEF 2025, Davos has underscored a critical juncture for Europe’s economy. While challenges abound—from sluggish growth rates and energy crises to fragmented financial systems—the potential solutions highlighted by leaders provide a roadmap for recovery and renewed competitiveness in an increasingly complex scenario. By harnessing her cultural strengths and building greater confidence in the well-defined markets, Europe can navigate these turbulent times toward a more sustainable economic future.
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT DONALD Trump’s return to the White House has united the nations of G7 to the G77 blocs in anxiety over tax and tariff issues. Trump, a Republican with a protectionist pedigree of his party, is known for popularizing the unpopular opinions and mainstreaming defiant stances. Tariff is the most favourite word in his vocabulary, with Trump himself identified himself as a “Tariff man.” His admiration for President McKinley, the 25th President of the USA, is well-known. McKinley is famous for his signature tariff initiative, the Tariff Act of 1890. The Ohio congressman-turned-president also signed the Dingley Tariff, named after Nelson Dingley, a congressman from Maine. One of President Trump’s most remarkable economic strategies was the adoption of protectionist policies aimed at reducing the U.S. trade deficit and reshoring manufacturing jobs.
Trump’s Tariff
As a presidential candidate, Trump advocated for broad tariffs: a 20% tax on imports from all countries including that of global south, a 25% tariff on goods from Mexico and Canada, and a steep 60% levy on products from China. Observers have debated the severity of these developments. He also announced his intention to leverage tariffs as a negotiating tool, targeting nations like Denmark to pressure them into making concessions—such as ceding control of Greenland to the United States. Home is his fort, and to ensure that comfort zone, he may abandon promises made by his predecessors. Right after assuming office, the President threatened to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada, his two immediate neighbors and major trading partners.
Europe and Trump
The EU has a cherishable trade surplus with the U.S., with the U.S. having a trade deficit of about $161.6 billion in 2023, according to Eurostat data. The U.S. is the largest trade and investment partner of the EU, as well as its main source of foreign direct investment (FDI). Germany and Italy are major exporters to the U.S., and these countries would be deeply affected by any restructured trade arrangement. Brussels would likely unite in response if this happens. Despite being a significant (about 46%) LNG exporter, the U.S. is likely to woo EU nations to import more oil in line with Trump’s “drill, baby, drill” slogan. The arms-import watchdog SIPRI has predicted that, under Trump, EU and NATO nations will stockpile U.S. supplies for their armaments. This trend has already been visible after Ukraine was besieged. Trump will eventually encourage American defence manufacturers to explore Global South markets in coming years.
There is a perception in the air that several EU nations won’t comply with the Undertaxed Profit Rules (UTPR). According to the market experts, President Trump will likely add 10% tariffs on imports other than those from China. While the tariffs fluctuated, at one point, they reached as high as 60% on some Chinese goods. These tariffs were intended to punish China for unfair trade practices, intellectual property theft, and currency manipulation, while incentivizing U.S. manufacturers to bring production back home. However, this approach led to tensions with China, which retaliated with tariffs of its own on U.S. goods, including agricultural products like soybeans, corn, wheat, pork, beef, and other commodities.
Job Creation in the U.S. and Work Visa
In his maiden term, President Trump’s economic policies focused on bringing manufacturing jobs back to the United States. The US China trade war further led to the loss of 245,000 U.S. jobs, according to the U.S.-China Business Council.
In his earlier tenure, Trump sought to restrict and minimize immigration, particularly through more stringent visa policies. His administration focused on curbing the H-1B visa program, which allowed highly skilled workers from countries like India and China to take jobs in tech and other specialized fields in the U.S. Trump’s administration made efforts to make these visas harder to obtain, arguing that they displaced American workers. While this created pressure in high-tech industries, it also spurred efforts to increase domestic training programs and promote automation. Rust Belt states like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are expected to bring more changes for revenues.
The Panama Canal
Trump’s approach to global infrastructure projects was another source of contention. The Panama Canal, a strategic waterway for global trade, became an area of focus under the Trump administration. Trump’s rhetoric often suggested that U.S. interests should have a greater say in Panama’s operations, even hinting at a reevaluation of U.S. involvement in the canal’s security and operations. On the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), José Raúl Mulino, President of Panama assured that Panama Canal would maintain sovereignty.
US Dollar Hegemony
Trump’s protectionism was also reflected in his stance on alternative currency plans by BRICS nations. A long-term consequence of Trump’s foreign policies has been the growing trend of countries attempting to bypass the U.S. dollar in international trade transactions. Nations like Russia, China, and Iran have increasingly sought to use alternative currencies for trade, reducing their dependency on the dollar.
China, for instance, has pushed for the use of the yuan in global trade agreements, particularly with countries in Asia and Africa. The rise of digital currencies and regional trade agreements that use non-dollar currencies further highlights this shift. While the U.S. dollar remains the dominant global reserve currency, Trump’s protectionist policies and sanctions may have accelerated this diversification of global trade. Currency-trade is trending but Trump administration is bound to take strict measures if the de-dollarisation threats US dollar hegemony.
Trump’s Impact on the Supply Chain and Mobility Costs
The Trump administration’s protectionist approach had a significant effect on global supply chains during his first term. Tariffs, particularly those on Chinese goods, disrupted long-standing trade relationships and forced companies to reconsider their manufacturing locations. The cost of mobility, particularly in terms of shipping and logistics, increased as companies faced higher tariffs and delays due to trade tensions. In industries like automotive and electronics, U.S. companies found themselves paying higher prices for raw materials and components. Additionally, the increased cost of labour due to visa restrictions in certain sectors, such as tech, also pushed companies to reevaluate their workforce strategies. Trump administration will review these two concerns widely.
Foreign Direct Investment Under Trump
Trump’s foreign policy, particularly his stance on tariffs and international trade agreements, noticeably affected foreign direct investment (FDI) in the U.S. On one hand, some investors were attracted to the U.S. due to the promise of a more favourable corporate tax environment. On the other hand, the trade war and unpredictability in policy made the U.S. a less attractive destination for certain foreign investments, particularly from countries caught in the crossfire of tariffs.
Technology Transfer and Technological Access: A Battle for Innovation
One of the key aspects of Trump’s trade war with China was the issue of intellectual property rights and technology transfer. Trump pushed for stricter regulations that would limit the transfer of sensitive technologies to China, citing concerns over national security and the protection of U.S. technological supremacy.
The U.S. administration under Trump took a harder line on Chinese tech giants like Huawei, accusing them of stealing intellectual property and posing security threats. At the same time, Trump’s policies raised concerns about the future of global technological collaboration and the ease with which companies could operate in international markets. His stance on TikTok also attracted attention, with Trump directing a postponement of the ban by 75 days.
In his second term, Trump may revise the Biden administration’s decision to remove Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. His policies often involve rechristening, removal, and re-installation. His administration is also likely to impose sharp sanctions on Venezuela. Under his administration, the Gulf of Mexico is set to be renamed the Gulf of America, and Alaska’s Mount Denali is expected to revert to being called Mount McKinley—honouring the 25th American president whose tariff policies inspired him. The value of Bitcoin is expected to rise significantly. Trump has kept significant focus on the southern border to reshape the US foreign policy. His policicies surrounding Mexican drug cartels and illegal immigration led to increased border enforcement and the construction of a physical border wall. Despite the controversy surrounding his immigration policies, Trump’s administration is destined to take a defiant stance to curb drug trafficking and organized crime. While protectionist measures like high tariffs on China will reshape global trade, such measures also led to new alliances and competition in global markets. At home, Trump’s job creation strategies are regionally targeted, particularly in industrial states, but the initiatives will also encounter challenges due to restrictions on immigration and labour mobility.
◉ EMPTYING THE SMOKE from his mouth after a drag of his Marlboro cigarette, Mohammed Jalali, the $140-a-month salaried Prime Minister under Bashar al-Assad, asserted the Kurdish-oriented news outlet Rudaw that it was not the tumultuous 13-year war that ended the 54-year-old Al-Assad regime, but rather poverty and corruption. Ministers were receiving only $70 a month under Bashar Al-Assad’s autocracy, while government workers were paid a mere $20, creating an unbearable struggle for everyday life. A lightning rebel offensive in the dawn of December 8 changed the course of Syria’s fate, filling millions with euphoria and optimism. On the dawn of December 8, 2024, Syrians were surprised to learn that their president of 24 years had sought refuge in Russia, which granted asylum to Assad and his family members. Two days after Assad’s departure, at current leader Al-Sharaa’s order, the Malboro loyalist and academia professional Mohammed Jalali transferred the authority to Mohammed Bashir, establishing an interim government set to last until March 2025.
Ministry and the Men of Matches
Syria is now ruled by a hung power of multiple hardliners, drawing experiences from military warfare. De facto leader of the present time, Ahmed al-Sharaa, better known by his nom de guerre Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and the dominant force in the rebel alliance, spearheaded the lightning offensive that toppled Bashar al-Assad’s regime . An engineering graduate and gas industry veteran, Mohammed al-Bashir, is the man of his choice to install as interim Prime Minister. Sharaa’s general, Murhaf Abu Qasra, is appointed to head the Defense Ministry. Once a hardcore Islamist leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa has rizzed several Western and Arab state-leaders or diplomats. In less than a month, the HTS-led government has established formal diplomatic relations with nearly 30 countries.
Test & Trials ahead Sharaa
Spiraling inflation, a plummeting currency, and, moreover, crippling fuel shortages present the new government with its most pressing challenges, in addition to the need to restore stability and facilitate the return of millions of refugees.
Typically, a regime change leads to a currency devaluation, but Syria’s situation is an exception. Following Assad’s downfall, the country saw an influx of dollars—not only from areas that had previously been under rebel control, but also from the surge of foreign entities and organizations entering Syria.
Economy, Life & Consumption
Syria’s economic crisis, already dire before the onset of civil war in 2011, has worsened tragically. The World Bank’s 2022 data estimated the country’s economy at just $23.63 billion. The economic squeeze has been exacerbated by a stream of interconnected crises, including regional instability, international sanctions, domestic mismanagement, and of course the last devastating earthquake. The humanitarian crisis in Syria is staggering, with over 16 million Syrians—roughly 70% of the population—now in urgent need of assistance. Nearly 90% of the population lives under poverty.
In the year 2024, World Food Programme (WFP) has provided aid to over 1 million individuals in Syria. In 2023, prior to funding cuts that led to the suspension of its General Food Assistance program, WFP was supporting 5.5 million people. Looking ahead, the organization is seeking US$250 million to help 2.8 million people in 2025.
Syria’s Reincarnation
In the wake of World War I, the Ottoman Empire gave way to a new order, and France, was entrusted with a mandate over the northern expanse of the former Ottoman province of Syria. For nearly three decades, French rule sought to reshape the land, its people, and its governance, until, in 1946, Syria achieved her long-sought independence. In 1958, amidst a wave of pan-Arab fervor, the country entered into an ambitious alliance with Egypt, forming the short-lived United Arab Republic (UAR). But the two divorced from the union ultimately in 1961.
Syria’s social fabric is a mosaic, with Arabs comprising around 50% of the population, followed by significant minorities including Alawites at approximately 15%, Kurds at 10%, Levantine, and others. Under Sharaa, Syria got her pace faster and several humanitarian agencies and western authorities are expected to come.
◉ In an interview with COGGS, Giorgio Cafiero, CEO of Gulf State Analytics and Adjunct Professor of Georgetown University opined that policymakers in Washington are excited that Syria is now drifting apart from Iran but how they will rule it remains a concern for them. UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir O Pedersen – while briefing to the Security Council on 8 January 2025, mentioned political transition as unclear. “We are ready to work with the caretaker authorities on how the nascent and important ideas and steps so far articulated and initiated could be developed towards a credible and inclusive political transition,” he stated further.
Before the civil war escalated in 2011, Syria was exporting 380,000 barrels per day (bpd) of oil, a key source of hard-currency revenue. However, this revenue stream vanished after the war broke out. Syria’s economic decline accelerated in 2019 when Lebanon, historically a vital economic partner, entered its own financial collapse. The once-robust economic ties between the two nations—spanning trade, banking, and remittances—disintegrated, depriving Syria of a crucial lifeline. In response, the current Syrian government introduced multiple exchange rates in a desperate attempt to regulate foreign currency flows and protect the remaining hard currency reserves.
Since the onset of the civil war in 2011, Syria’s dependence on oil imports has grown sharply, primarily relying on Iran to meet its dwindling domestic consumption needs. The country’s demand for oil has plummeted from 305,000 barrels per day (b/d) in 2010 to a mere 163,000 b/d in 2024, reflecting the profound toll the conflict has taken on Syria’s economy. Once a relatively self-sufficient producer, Syria’s oil output has drastically fallen from nearly 400,000 b/d before the war to just around 20,000 b/d today. Iraq could not supply because of Washington’s red-eye.
[Baniyas, Syria’s largest oil refinery located in the northwest part of the war-torn nation.]Syria’s oil infrastructure has also been severely impacted by the ongoing conflict. The country operates two refineries, one in Banias with a capacity of 120,000 b/d and another in Homs, capable of processing 107,100 b/d. However, due to extensive damage and a sharp decline in demand since the war’s eruption, both refineries are functioning far below their potential. As a result, Syria has become increasingly reliant on external sources, particularly Iran, to sustain its oil supply. Iran alone owed around $30 billion for its continued support. Reportage indicates that the new Syrian government has no intention of settling the debts incurred during the Assad era. Instead, it has asserted that Iran owes Syria $300 billion for the damage caused by its forces in the country.
Syria’s financial system remains precariously fragile. Current foreign currency reserves are very little, with only about $200 million held in the central bank, along with 26 tonnes of gold, which, at current market rates, is worth roughly $2.2 billion, according to Reuters. However, the country faces a massive shortage of liquidity due to severe sanctions and the freezing of Syrian assets abroad. Western governments, seeking to pressure the Assad regime, have frozen hundreds of millions of dollars in assets in countries ranging from Switzerland to the UK. According to Swiss authorities, around 99 million Swiss francs ($112 million) in Syrian assets are currently frozen in Switzerland, while the Syria Report newsletter estimated the UK holds some $205.76 million in frozen Syrian funds, as reported by Reuters.
Beyond the issue of frozen assets, the broader trade picture remains grim. The Syrian economy has been hit by a catastrophic collapse in both exports and imports. Exports, once a major source of revenue, have plunged from $18.4 billion in 2010 to just $1.8 billion in 2021. This is largely due to the destruction of oil fields, electricity, finance mechanism, supply chain, loss of tourist income, and the disruptions caused by ongoing conflict. At the same time, Syria’s imports—especially vital food and fuel—have remained a key economic burden. Despite falling imports overall, from $22.7 billion in 2010 to $6.5 billion in 2021, the country still struggles with shortages in basic goods, as the state remains heavily reliant on imported fuel and food, with limited foreign exchange to cover these costs. Inflation rates are astronomical, with the Syrian pound plummeting against the dollar, and unemployment has skyrocketed. Al Sharaa’s swift transition and reformist approach are promising signs, yet these two aspects remain under scrutiny, and are not entirely free from suspicion. Economic recovery is nearly impossible without significant international investment and support.
While the international community’s sanctions were intended to pressure the Assad regime, those sanctions have had a catastrophic effect on the general population. Syria’s economy, in its current state, has become one of the most isolated and impoverished in the world. As international support remains scarce and reconstruction efforts stalled, the country’s future depends on the nature, style and module of the leadership.
Russia’s role as a key wheat supplier has been impacted by the departure of Bashar al-Assad, and the US has shown little interest in re-engaging diplomatically with Damascus, especially with its embassy operations suspended since 2012. Meanwhile, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have expressed a willingness to provide energy assistance. Ankara will be a partner in reconstruction too. The status of HTS, considered a “foreign terrorist organization” by the EU, Turkey, and the US, continues to be a contentious issue, with Syrian officials like Sharaa urging the West to reconsider its designation. As the scenes in Damascus changes fast, with the region hosting diverse ethnic groups, both the US and the EU have signaled they will wait to see the policies of the new Syrian government before making decisions.
Syria faces urgent needs for investment and comprehensive restructuring across her financial, banking, energy and alternative energy, and transportation sectors. Private sector is the enabling factor of socio-economics. Beijing’s cautious approach and calculated steps focused on loans for infrastructure without the involvement of the US, EU, or Gulf states, will redifine the diplomacy in the region and the geo-economics in broader sense. Syria has been reborn multiple times throughout its history, but now is the moment to build a promised future for its compatriots—bringing home the 15 million displaced individuals to reclaim their sense of belonging. As the Sharaa-led hung power seeks to rebuild Syria, it stands at a crossroads, where new alliances may form and long-standing bilateral relationships may be renegotiated. Damascus under Sharaa- the man of the moment, exploring the “wisdom of Idlib” and the shifting regional realities, will likely pave a path shaped by these changing factors. The extent of the incumbent’s inclusivity, the nature of its accommodation, and the type of liberal market it will embrace—these are questions that spark both curiosity and concern. Yet, above all, Syria must finally be a place for Syrians.
In a recent panel discussion in New Delhi, COGGS Advisor and acclaimed journalist 
![[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)
![[ 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)
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.
economic resilience[1][2].
uncil.
