According to Qatar Central Bank’s data, the Sukuk’s maturity periods varied as follows: QR1.5 billion (an addition to an existing issuance) with a maturity date of January 16, 2029, and a yield of 4.5%, and QR1.5 billion (an addition to an existing issuance) with a maturity date of August 24, 2030, and a yield of 4.5%.

In a post on X (formerly Twitter), the bank clarified that total bids for the Sukuk reached approximately QR8 billion. The central financial institution also unveiled support measures for banks in response to Iranian attacks that severely weakened the Gulf’s third-largest economy.

The central bank will now offer unlimited local currency repurchase facilities against eligible securities held by local banks in order to ensure deep liquidity in the local market. This new facility offers maturities of up to three months, enabling Qatari banks to manage cash flow with greater certainty amid the ongoing volatility.

The industry’s senior executives, while interacting with The Banker, also said that Qatar Central Bank would reduce the reserve requirement on deposits from 4.5% to 3.5%, releasing further liquidity into the system. The central bank has been quizzing lenders about their liquidity in past weeks.

Qatar’s economy has been among the worst affected by the ongoing Middle East conflict. An attack from Iran on the Gulf country’s Ras Laffan liquefied natural gas (LNG) production hub knocked out 17% of the nation’s energy export capacity, in addition to creating an estimated annual revenue loss worth USD 20 billion, which may span for the next three to five years.

However, Qatar Central Bank has been proactive in ensuring the banking and finance industry doesn’t feel the heat. It has already permitted banks to offer borrowers the option to defer loan principal and interest payments for a period of up to three months, in accordance with lenders’ existing internal policies and supervisory guidance.

Analysis from S&P Global Ratings projected Qatar and Bahrain as the most vulnerable in the Gulf region to external outflows of foreign and local funding. However, for Qatar, the government has a proven record of supporting both the Islamic banking and the wider finance sector.

“Liquidity continues to be strong, capital levels significantly exceed regulatory requirements, and provisioning provides strong coverage against credit risk. Banks continue to hold substantial liquidity in both domestic and foreign currency, and resources are sufficient to meet customer demand, support normal market activity, and meet any short-term funding pressures under stressed conditions,” QCB said while reacting to the S&P report.

The post QCB issues government Ijara Sukuk, maintains Qatar’s banking resilience appeared first on International Finance.

According to a monthly bulletin by the Ministry of Economy, Oman’s non-oil GDP rose to RO 28.70 billion, marking a robust increase of 3.1%, compared with petroleum activities, which grew at a slower pace of 1.1% to reach RO 12.02 billion. Sustained activity expansion occurred across sectors like manufacturing, logistics, tourism and services. Inflation, on the other hand, remained contained at an average of 1.69% during January-February 2025/2026, indicating stable price levels that supported household consumption and business planning.

Foreign direct investment (FDI) stocks (total accumulated value of cross-border investments) increased to RO 31.38 billion by the end of Q4 2025, up 8.1%, reflecting continued investor confidence in the Sultanate’s long-term economic outlook. However, FDI inflows declined sharply by 33.7% to RO 2.36 billion, suggesting short-term caution amidst global economic uncertainty and tighter financial conditions due to volatile geopolitics.

Oil market trends, on the other hand, weighed on the broader outlook, with the average crude price falling by 13.1% to USD 63.3 per barrel by the end of February 2026, reflecting softer global demand and increased supply. However, with the Middle East conflict at its peak, which has also resulted in crude oil prices exceeding USD 100 per barrel, the impact on Oman’s economy in the coming days remains to be seen.

Discussing trade metrics, while the overall trade balance recorded a surplus of RO 255.9 million at the end of January 2026, there was a significant contraction of 51.5% compared to the same period in 2025. Imports increased by 10.9% to RO 1.58 billion, driven by higher domestic demand and ongoing project activity, while non-oil exports rose by 15.3% to RO 613 million, underscoring improving export diversification.

The post Oman ends FY 2025 with stable growth, non-oil GDP hits USD 74.6 billion appeared first on International Finance.

The council’s results from its regular “Skills Snapshot” come amid the publication of the latest GDP data, which suggests that the British economy barely expanded at the 2025-end (0.1% in the October-to-December period). While Enginuity’s survey happened before the Iran War, it still presents a disturbing picture: the Keir Starmer government has more than a challenge on its hands, as it needs to keep GDP growth on track this year, with the Iran war likely to push up inflation and hit demand.

Government figures issued in the final week of March 2026 reveal that under-19 apprenticeship starts have fallen to their lowest level in five years. The OECD (The Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development) downgraded growth forecasts, suggesting that the European country would be worst hit among leading nations from the Middle-East conflict.

Enginuity is worried that a crucial ‘tipping point’ may have already been reached for some sector businesses, despite recent government announcements providing additional financial incentives to ease the business burden and guarantee young people employment or training.

The charity revealed that the true cost of employing an engineering apprentice can exceed £157,000 during the three-year programme. Its “Policy Centre for Supply Chain and SMEs,” which commissioned the research, was established to amplify the voice of smaller British companies, to senior officials and will now feed the survey findings to the Starmer administration as a matter of urgency.

Among the key findings, 25% of respondents did not employ any apprentices at all. Additionally, 84% of the surveyed participants said that labour costs were the single biggest pressure forcing them to raise prices, followed by energy and utility costs and raw materials at 61%.

“More than 60% were pessimistic (on January 26) about the year ahead – even before the outbreak of war. 60% cited a lack of technical qualifications as a challenge to recruitment,” the report stated.

“The importance of SMEs is often hugely underestimated, making up more than 99% of all businesses in the UK and more than 95% of the manufacturing and engineering sector. Survey respondents (more than 250 companies) employ a total of 10,000 and generate £1.9 billion to the UK economy,” said Ann Watson, CEO of Enginuity.

“It is a mixed picture, but for many in the sector, the situation was bad to begin with. But it has got a whole lot worse in recent weeks. The current energy crisis due to the war in the Middle East is piling more economic pressure on us. Direct contact with many organisations in recent days makes us extremely concerned. With 25% of respondents not employing any apprentices at all, and others telling us that they may stop employing them, this could prove disastrous for the skills system in the UK,” she observed.

Explaining things further, Chris Houston, Managing Director of Tadweld, a leading steel fabrication and engineering company, said, “In 2023, the minimum wage for an apprentice welder was 6 pound/hour. Whilst that may seem low, apprentices attend college one day per week, and we pay them for that time too. They’re in training for most of the time they are with us, working alongside a skilled fabricator, so we’ve always seen apprentices as an investment rather than an employee able to produce high volumes of work.”

“In 2024, the apprentice NLW increased to £7.50/hour, and then in 2025 it increased to 10 pound/hour. That’s a staggering 66% increase in 2 years. It makes offering apprenticeships exceptionally expensive,” he concluded.

The post British SMEs may turn back on apprenticeships: Enginuity’s survey appeared first on International Finance.

Just over a year ago, the US economy was labelled the ‘envy of the world’ by The Economist, but today the country seems to be at a crossroads due to various factors, such as a slowdown in economic growth and a softer job market, which are impacting the growth of the American economy. Additionally, cost-of-living concerns and the Middle East crisis have further complicated the lives of the average American household.

Against this backdrop, Dr Conor O’Kane, Senior Lecturer in Economics at Bournemouth University, offers his assessment of the country’s economic health.

In an exclusive interview with International Finance, Dr Conor O’Kane discusses inflation trends, the role of the Federal Reserve, labour market shifts, and the broader risks shaping America’s economic outlook.

How strong is the United States economy right now, and what indicators best reflect its true health?

Many of the macroeconomic fundaments for the US economy are strong, with the US set to continue leading the G7 in key areas like economic growth and productivity. However, even before the recent outbreak of war with Iran, there was some economic data that would become a cause for concern if the trend should continue.

Economic growth for the 4th quarter of 2025 was revised down to 0.7%, a sharp and unexpected decline from the previous quarter’s 4.4% growth.

Also, the US unemployment rate was 4.3% in January 2026, a slight increase from the 4% rate in January 2025. The US economy added an average of just 49,000 jobs per month in 2025, down from an estimated gain of 168,000 a month the year before.

Inflation has been a major concern for American households. Do you believe current policies are doing enough to bring prices down?

The post-COVID period saw a significant inflation spike in many advanced economies. In the US, inflation peaked at 9.1% in June 2022.

In response, policymakers at the Federal Reserve aggressively raised interest rates with the figure going up from 0.5% in February 2020 to 5.5% in July 2023, which had the desired impact. Since mid-2022, inflation has been on a downward trend and was 2.4% in February 2026, closing in on the Federal Reserve’s target 2% rate.

However, the cumulative inflation increase in the US since 2020 is approximately 26%, so while the rate of annual price increases has indeed slowed down, prices are still significantly higher, and consumers are feeling this cost-of-living squeeze.

Job numbers often make headlines, but are they the best measure of economic success in the US today?

Traditionally, new job creation numbers have been one of the key metrics for the US economy. They are considered a leading indicator in the Federal Reserve’s interest rate-setting policy.

However, in recent years, we have seen periods of relatively strong economic growth figures without the accompanying job creation. One possible explanation for this ‘jobless growth’ is that firms are using AI and automation to improve productivity. For example, the data centres needed to power AI require significant investment expenditure but do not need many employees to actually operate them once up and running.

How much does stock market performance really tell us about the financial well-being of ordinary Americans?

First and foremost, the stock market is not the economy! The best way to think about stock market performance is as a forward-looking snapshot of investor expectations of future corporate profits.

Approximately 50% of US workers have their retirement savings invested in the stock market through their 401(k) savings plans, and hence there is a link between the markets and 401(k) holders’ wealth. However, another 50% of American workers have little or no link to the fortunes of the stock market.

The US stock market gained 19% in the period from January 2025 until February 2026. However, when compared to stock market returns from other advanced economies, the US ranks 21st out of 23 countries, with only New Zealand and Denmark indices doing worse. It is likely that the uncertainty surrounding the US ‘liberation day’ tariffs announced in April 2025 dampened investors’ expectations regarding the future profitability of US firms.

The Federal Reserve has taken several steps to manage inflation. Are its policies helping or hurting economic growth?

Like many central banks, the Federal Reserve focuses on achieving its 2.0% inflation target. When inflation rose to over 9% in 2022, the series of interest rate hikes did seem to get inflation and, more importantly, inflation expectations on a trend back towards its target rate. The expectation was that 2025 would see more rate cuts, but concerns over the potential inflationary impact of the US administration’s tariff policy meant the Federal Reserve adopted a more cautious approach to rate cutting. All things considered, I think the Federal Reserve policymakers have done well over the last few years.

With rapid advances in artificial intelligence, should Americans be excited about new opportunities or worried about job losses?

The answer to this depends on who you are. If AI delivers the kind of productivity improvements and cost savings that it seems to promise, this should improve the profitability of many US firms. This would also likely benefit many US workers with 401(k) savings plans.

However, if you don’t have a 401(k) investment plan, or you have a job that AI can easily replace, well then, you might be a little bit less excited about the potential impact of AI.

A recent Financial Times poll found that about 60% of Trump voters were concerned about AI’s rapid development, and almost 80% believed the technology required more regulation.

Given President Donald Trump’s stated policy goal of establishing US global dominance in AI, these issues have the potential to become a controversial policy objective going forward. I expect this, and the cost-of-living, to be a major policy issue in the 2026 mid-term elections later this year.

How vulnerable is the US economy to global shocks such as conflicts, trade tensions, or energy price spikes?

Many of the US macroeconomic fundaments are in a good place now, and that does provide room in terms of economic resilience. However, history shows us that energy-related supply shocks have often been the trigger for recessions. The current conflict in the Middle East has the potential to develop into a major global energy crisis.

Over the last two decades, the US has become self-sufficient in terms of its oil needs. However, while a spike in energy prices might be good news for US energy producers, the US public will likely bear the brunt of the increase in energy prices.

What are the biggest risks facing the US economy over the next two to three years?

Given where we are today, with the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and the potential for a major energy price spike, you would have to say that the key risk over the next few years is stagflation. This is a relatively rare economic environment, characterised by stagnant economic growth, accompanied by higher inflation and unemployment. We last saw this in the 1970s because of the oil price shocks in 1972 and 1979. There is a risk that this could happen again, which should concern policymakers.

If you had to identify one policy change that could significantly strengthen the US economy, what would it be and why?

The policy change I would recommend is to end the chaotic tariff policy that the current US administration is following. It is causing enormous uncertainty and is damaging to American consumers, who we know are paying most of the tariffs.

It is also damaging to domestic US investment and FDI in the US, as firms are reluctant to invest in an environment where tariffs are regularly changed on the whim of the president or due to Supreme Court rulings.

The institutions that run the global economy were designed and run by the US. The free trade policy pursued since Bretton Woods in 1944 has helped many US firms become globally dominant in a range of industry sectors. Tearing up the global rules-based economic order, from which you have massively benefited, is not sound economic policymaking. It needs to stop.

The post Tariff fickleness tearing up global economic order tailor-made for US companies: Dr Conor O’Kane appeared first on International Finance.

After serving as Skoda’s largest market for years with deliveries of over 300,000 between 2016 and 2018, sales in China collapsed to just 15,000 in 2025, as foreign automakers face tough competition from local brands, especially in the EV domain. The 2025 figures also resulted in a sales decline of more than 95%, which reduced the brand’s market share to below 0.1%.

“The company will continue to sell Skoda models in the Chinese market in collaboration with a regional partner until mid-2026,” Volkswagen said in a statement, while announcing the automaker’s next focus area: strengthening the brand’s presence in India and Southeast Asia, where it saw growth ‌in ⁠2025.

“After-sales services for Skoda vehicles will continue to be provided in China,” the company said.

Skoda’s move isn’t surprising, given that its parent Volkswagen has been facing a tough time in China, where local brands BYD and Geely have overtaken the German company in terms of sales. Not only Volkswagen, but almost all Western legacy carmakers have also been struggling to keep up in a growing EV market, with Chinese companies excelling in terms of introducing cost-friendly, yet feature-laden cars.

Volkswagen, however, along with its subsidiary Audi, is still holding ground in the world’s second-largest economy through product launches and increasingly localised production activities.

Volkswagen Group CEO Oliver Blume recently told German newspaper Bild am Sonntag that Germany could learn from China’s industrial policy approach, when it comes to reforming both the European country’s automobile sector and the broader domestic economy.

“The Chinese take a very systematic approach with so-called five-year plans and have clear priorities with that too. It’s optimally structured. And what we find very positive in China is a high level of discipline and willingness to implement these initiatives,” he said, while adding that in the Asian country, Volkswagen currently faces “over 150 competitors ⁠and strong innovation dynamics.”

The post Skoda retreats as Chinese EVs dominate appeared first on International Finance.

Stating that trade frictions cannot be resolved by raising protectionist barriers, Giovanni Tria, Italy’s former minister of economy and finance, told the Global Times, “Tariff tensions are having a big impact on the global economy.” He stressed that countries need to practice globalisation, which is the basis for development around the world.

Former Italian prime minister Paolo Gentiloni, while stating that globalisation will continue, remarked during the seminar, “the risk is that global trade in the future will not be based on rules, but on force and coalition,” stressing that the European Union (EU) is “very concerned” about such a shift.

He further added that raising protectionist barriers is not the solution to trade frictions. He called for efforts “to keep rules-based trade, free trade, going,” and requested countries to “invest in WTO reform… and give credit to the WTO.”

Former US Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez, who was part of the panel, added that the economic cost of protectionism is also becoming more evident. He told the Global Times, “Tariffs are not a way to manage the global economy permanently.”

He further noted that despite ongoing frictions between Washington and Beijing, room remains for economic cooperation between the world’s two largest economies.

Li Cheng, a professor in the Department of Politics and Public Administration at the University of Hong Kong, said that the current wave of tariff and trade tensions should be seen as part of a broader and widely shared trend in the West, especially in the United States. He also said that protectionist sentiment and scepticism toward globalisation have been growing across political and economic circles right now, reflecting deeper structural issues in the US, when it comes to domestic distribution challenges and shifts in the global economic landscape.

Cheng doesn’t see trade conflicts disappearing in the near term, and Washington’s current protectionist approach should be seen as a result of weakness, confusion and fear. Stressing that these trends indicate a fundamental transformation in the global trade and economic landscape, he called for greater emphasis on multilateralism, international cooperation and respect for global institutions such as the WTO.

Wong Kan Seng, former deputy prime minister of Singapore, said that rising trade tensions, supply chain reconfigurations and increasing government interventions (subsidies and investment screening) are driving up costs and fragmenting global trade in the process. Such shifts will only make things like duplicated supply chains, higher trading costs and conflicting regulatory regimes the new normal, thereby placing greater pressure on smaller and emerging economies.

However, according to Robert Koopman, former chief economist of the World Trade Organisation and Hurst Senior Professorial Lecturer at American University, China has shown strong resilience and adaptability amid the ongoing global trade warfare and has started diversifying its portfolio.

The post Boao Forum for Asia Conference: Panellists advocate for rules-based free trade appeared first on International Finance.

Malaysia’s Investment, Trade, and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Johari Abdul Ghani stated that the US-Malaysia Agreement on Reciprocal Trade (ART) no longer holds any legality. He further claimed the deal was not suspended or paused, but terminated.

“It is not on hold. It is no longer there, it’s null and void,” Johari said, as reported by the New Straits Times. He further told reporters that if tariffs were imposed and legitimised based on a trade surplus, authorities should clearly specify the industry involved instead of implementing the mechanism on a blanket basis.

The ART was signed on the sidelines of the 47th ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur in October 2025, with Donald Trump and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim as signatories. The agreement covered roughly 12% of Malaysia’s exports to the United States, offering improved market access for Malaysian exporters while making American products more competitive for Malaysian businesses. Under its terms, the world’s largest economy maintained a 19% reciprocal tariff on most Malaysian imports, with carve-outs for select goods.

The voiding of the deal comes at a particularly fraught moment. In March, the Trump administration launched a sweeping Section 301 trade investigation, authorised under the Trade Act of 1974, targeting 16 trading partners, including Malaysia.

Section 301 allows Washington to impose additional tariffs on countries found to be engaging in unfair trade practices. Johari identified Malaysia’s key vulnerable sectors as electrical and electronics, oil and gas, plantation commodities including palm oil, rubber gloves, and other rubber-based goods.

He stressed that Malaysian exporters must ensure compliance with labour and environmental standards to minimise exposure.

Domestically, the development has triggered a political response. Opposition coalition Perikatan Nasional has called for a special parliamentary session to address the collapse of the agreement, with secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan warning of potential damage to export sectors and supply chains.

Donald Trump, for his part, has warned of significantly higher retaliatory tariffs against any nation attempting to exploit the Supreme Court ruling to unpick existing trade arrangements, a threat that hangs directly over Kuala Lumpur’s decision.

The post Malaysia voids US trade deal after SC strikes down ‘Trump Tariffs’ appeared first on International Finance.

As Australia continues to be affected by inflationary pressures and global headwinds, Dr John Hawkins has emerged as a prominent voice offering insight into the nation’s outlook.

Dr John Hawkins is the head of the Canberra School of Government at the University of Canberra. He was formerly a senior economist at the Reserve Bank of Australia, the Australian Treasury, and the Bank for International Settlements, and he also served as secretary to the Senate Economics Committee.

In an exclusive interview with International Finance, Dr John Hawkins discusses the economic outlook for Australia, cost-of-living crisis affecting the country, and the Reserve Bank of Australia’s rate hikes. Additionally, he shares his views on economic resilience, the stability of small and medium enterprises, and the debt burden on Australian households.

International Finance: What trends are currently shaping consumer confidence in Australia, and how might they influence spending patterns?

Dr John Hawkins: Consumer confidence is well below its long-term average. The main cause is ‘cost of living’ pressures. The Reserve Bank of Australia’s decision to increase interest rates again at its March meeting, and conjecture that it is likely to move again, could well see consumer confidence slump further.

How is Australia balancing economic growth with sustainability and climate-related challenges?

Australia had introduced an emissions trading scheme, which operated from 2012 to 2014 with a temporary fixed price. It would have allowed greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced in the most efficient manner, but was scrapped following a change of government at the 2013 election. Australia now has a target of reducing emissions by 43% from 2005 levels by 2030 and achieving net zero by 2050. It is being implemented by a range of sectoral plans. Treasury modelling in 2025 concluded the transition is consistent with the Australian economy growing by around 80% from 2025 to 2050.

What impact are recent trade developments having on Australian exporters and importers?

The United States takes less than a tenth of Australian exports, so the direct impact of higher US tariffs is modest. More important will be the impact of US tariffs on China and our other major trading partners.

How resilient is the Australian economy to fluctuations in global commodity prices?

Iron ore, coal and gold are significant sources of export revenue, so commodity price movements are important. But the floating exchange rate serves as a buffer as the Australian dollar tends to depreciate when commodity prices fall.

In what ways are small and medium-sized businesses faring in the current economic climate?

Liaison by the Reserve Bank in 2025 found that, while improving, business conditions for small businesses are weaker than for large businesses. Most small businesses, however, remain profitable and can readily access credit.

How is household debt affecting economic stability and purchasing power in Australia?

Household debt remains high by historical standards. But the debt is concentrated on households that can manage it. Less than 1% of households with home mortgage loans are significantly in arrears.

Are there sectors in Australia that are positioned for growth despite broader economic uncertainty?

Most areas of the economy are likely to keep growing as, unlike some OECD countries, the Australian population is still expanding.

How are wage growth and cost-of-living pressures shaping the everyday experience of Australians?

As evidenced by its being the dominant concern in opinion polls, cost-of-living pressures are weighing heavily on many Australian households. With consumer prices currently growing by 3.8% while wage growth is 3.4%, many Australian households are finding it harder to afford everyday purchases.

What role is technological innovation playing in transforming traditional industries in Australia?

Business investment and firms’ investment intentions have picked up recently. The renewable energy transition and construction of data centres are examples of technological innovations driving this investment.

Looking ahead, what are the most significant challenges and opportunities for Australia’s economic future?

Geopolitical uncertainty is a major challenge. Domestically, Australian productivity growth has been weak in recent years. But the recent re-election of the government with a comfortable majority increases the opportunity for productivity-enhancing economic reforms.

The post Australian households struggle to afford everyday purchases: Dr John Hawkins appeared first on International Finance.

The goal was simple: securing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and semiconductor supply chains, with countries like the US, Australia, Greece, Israel, Japan, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Singapore, the UAE, and the United Kingdom feeling the urge to derisk their supply chains in the coming years. In February 2026, the group saw a notable entry, with India, the world’s fourth-largest economy, joining the alliance.

When talking about the Pax Silica, Jacob Helberg, US Undersecretary of State for Economic Affairs, told CNBC, “Pax Silica is really not about China, it is about America. We want to secure our supply chains.”

But then, the question remains: to secure from whom?

Let’s go back to October 2025, when the Xi Jinping-led China decided to tighten export controls for its critical rare-earth metals, effectively turning the global economy’s dependence upon these materials into a strategic leverage.

So, if we look at the developments that made the headlines since October 2025, we may be witnessing a phenomenon where globalisation is evolving into a pattern where it is picking sides, with supply chains getting reorganised along geopolitical lines. Is it going against the core principle of globalisation as a concept itself, which preaches the growing interdependence of the economies, cultures, and populations, facilitated by factors like cross-border trade in goods and services, technology, flow of investment, people and information.

Weaponised supply chain

Let’s go back to October 2025 again, when China announced its ’announcement number 61 of 2025’, increasing export controls for five rare-earth metals in addition to the seven the Xi Jinping administration announced in April in the same year.

Out of the 17 rare-earth metals in total, China put export restrictions on 12 of them. Not stopping there, it also placed restrictions on the export of specialist technological equipment required to refine rare-earth metals. Foreign companies were mandated to obtain special approvals from Beijing if they wished to export rare-earth magnets and certain semiconductor materials containing a minimum 0.1% heavy rare-earth metals from the world’s second-largest economy.

Citing the rationale of national security interests for the move, which has been in effect since December 2025, China made sure that foreign companies end up explaining the intended use of the product they wish to make using Chinese rare-earth metals, attacking the very basis of globalisation, which advocates unrestricted flow of cross-border trade in goods, services and technology.

The Xi Jinping administration, however, believes that since rare-earth-related items have dual-use properties for civilian and military applications, implementing export controls on them is an ’international practice’.

In October 2025, the Chinese Commerce Ministry spokesperson told these exact things to the global media: “Certain foreign organisations and individuals have been directly transferring – or processing and then transferring – controlled rare-earth materials originating from China to relevant organisations and individuals directly or indirectly for military and other sensitive applications.”

Rare-earth metals are used in the production of electric cars, lithium-ion batteries, LED televisions, AI semiconductors and camera lenses. Most importantly, these raw materials are crucial for the US defence industry. According to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) think tank, rare earths are used to manufacture components of F-35 fighter jets, Virginia and Columbia-class submarines, Tomahawk missiles, radar systems, Predator unmanned aerial vehicles, and the Joint Direct Attack Munition series of smart bombs.

In 2023 alone, the United States emerged as the largest importer of Chinese rare-earth minerals and products, importing $22.8 million worth of products from the world’s second-largest economy, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC). China, in total, exported $117 million in rare-earth metals and products that year. As per the US Geological Survey report, Washington sourced 70% of its rare-earth compounds and metals imports from China between 2020 and 2023.

Some argue that China’s weaponisation of its rare-earth supply chain is a strong response to the United States limiting Beijing’s access to semiconductors in 2022. The policy, formed under the watch of the previous Democrat administration, led by Joe Biden, hasn’t changed at all, even in 2026. And the approach has been a bipartisan one, with some American lawmakers even pushing for greater restrictions, warning that Beijing could reverse-engineer or independently develop advanced semiconductor technologies, with the bid to overtake Uncle Sam in both technological and military terms. The ongoing tariff conflict between the two sides has complicated matters since the start of Trump 2.0.

Pax Silica countering Chinese pressure?

Rahul Nath Choudhury, a Delhi-based economist specialised in international trade, trade policy, investment, advisory and research who has handled several economic and trade-related projects for the Government of India’s Ministry of Commerce, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, International Finance Corporation and Singapore government’s Ministry of Trade and Industry, told International Finance that globalisation has always been transactional and geopolitically inclined towards the countries that are politically and strategically aligned and share common interests.

“Inter-country blocks, such as BRICS, ASEAN, and the EU, all have some common features. The emerging incidents like trade war, political unrest, and civil disorder have further influenced the decision of various countries to align or tilt towards like-minded countries and reduce the impact of global uncertainties. This is evident as countries increasingly enter into trade, investment and strategic agreements, with those countries that are geopolitically aligned, rather than purely based on commercial efficiency,” he said.

On the other hand, Derek Scissors, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, whose research concerns the Chinese, Indian, Japanese and other Asian economies, and their connections to the American economy, commented, “Globalisation was initiated and led by the US. The Trump administration wants to partly reverse that, to make trade and investment more transactional. However, Trump administration agreements are being reached without approval from the US Congress, and may not last beyond 2028. The long-term path for globalisation is unclear. The global economy may fade somewhat in favour of regional blocs. It’s hard to see China’s goal of taking a dominant position in as many supply chains as possible being compatible with the goals of other large economies.”

However, there is no doubt that China is weaponising its supply chains. Given that it is the largest producer of rare-earth metals, mining at least 60% and processes about 90% of these resources (as per CSIS’s report in 2024), it is going to use this as a leverage to gain a position of dominance in global geopolitics.

This raises questions about the idea of a deeply connected global economy.

Stating that he doesn’t believe in a deeply connected global economy, Derek said, “All the connections and associations have always been among like-minded countries that share common interests. We are now experiencing the emergence of a bipolar/ multipolar world where power is no longer concentrated with one country. The entire concept of a deeply connected global economy is getting reshaped with the advancement of new developments. The idea of ‘Pax Silica’ also brings together like-minded nations, which, in turn, reflects a broader shift toward concentrated globalisation, instead of one integrated global system.”

The trend now is “China Plus One”

A new feature of the post-pandemic global order is the ‘China Plus One’ business strategy. Companies are now diversifying their supply chains and manufacturing bases beyond China, adding alternative locations in Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam, Thailand or India. The reason: mitigate business and supply chain-related exposure to China, given the geopolitical tensions that crop up often between the world’s second-largest economy and the United States-led Western Bloc.

Tim Cook-led Apple has become the brand ambassador of this practice. The iPhone maker has been aggressively diversifying its supply chain in the last couple of years, placing its bets on Vietnam and India. Till COVID-19 showed up, China used to be at the centre of everything Apple used to do, especially in terms of manufacturing. Then, as the pandemic kicked in, lockdowns in key manufacturing hubs like Zhengzhou, dubbed ’iPhone City’, caused severe production bottlenecks and shipment delays for the American giant, ultimately impacting the global product availability.

Also, given that bilateral trade relations between the world’s two largest economies have been anything but normal, manufacturing and shipping products from China will always face the risk of being tariffed.

So, Apple wanted a resilient and future-proof manufacturing network and, in that pursuit, found their answers in Vietnam and India, with advantages like considerable lower labour costs, attractive government policies, and import tariff rates suiting high-tech manufacturing, and, most importantly, capturing the lion’s share of one of the world’s largest and fastest-growing smartphone markets (again India), while maintaining its sales and profits lead in the home market of United States.

Rahul Nath says, “The China Plus One strategy does not seem to be over. Companies in various parts of the world are still exploring the option of relocating their base from China to other locations, despite it being a very difficult task. I don’t see this ending in the near future, at least in 2026.”

Derek, however, had a nuanced view of the unfolding scenario.

“The China Plus One strategy is much more a response to predatory Chinese policies than US-China decoupling. The problem with American policy is its inconsistency, as with President Trump being extremely conciliatory to China prior to his trip to Beijing at the end of March 2025,” he noted.

Another trend, which is also likely to redefine the transactional nature of the neo-globalisation, is ’friend-shoring’, which is already happening in domains like technology and semiconductors, with politically allied nations (read Uncle Sam and his friends) strategically relocating supply chains in a way to gradually reduce dependence on China.

Initiatives like the CHIPS and Science Act in the US, implemented by the Joe Biden administration, incentivise domestic semiconductor manufacturing while mandating that companies receiving federal funds restrict capacity expansion in China. While preventing access to high-end semiconductors for China, to maintain an edge over Beijing in the AI race, has been a consistent policy take in the White House, irrespective of the administration’s political alignment, ’Pax Silica’ in 2026, looks like an extension of a ’Minus China’ approach – building resilient, secure, and trusted networks for critical components without Beijing.

On this, Rahul Nath said, “Today, every major government is trying to reshape their supply chains in a way that insulates them from geopolitical risks. This is affecting big businesses in all areas and influencing their strategy and investment decisions. The semiconductor industry is particularly active in responding to these changes. According to a report by The Engineer, manufacturers from the EU and the US are increasingly moving their supply chains to North America, the UK, Mexico, Vietnam, India and North Africa to minimise geopolitical risks and increase proximity to key markets. Several major projects are underway in North America. Numerous new semiconductor factories are being built in the US and Europe to boost regional production and reduce dependence on Asian suppliers.”

Middle powers’ strategic cooperation path

Hurt by China’s rare-earth minerals’ export control in 2025, European policymakers have taken a new stance, which is basically a ’do no harm’ approach. Bilateral engagement continues, while carefully avoiding escalation. And Donald Trump’s maverick approach to the continent, especially in the garb of resetting trade ties, is forcing the European leadership to seek diplomatic and commercial reassurance from the Xi Jinping government, despite structural issues like widening trade imbalances, persistent concerns over industrial overcapacity, growing unease over economic coercion risks, and China’s continued alignment with Russia remaining firmly in place.

Canada, United States’ all-weather North American ally, too, has faced a tariff onslaught from the Trump administration, forcing Ottawa to reassess its economic ties with Beijing, which were marked by years of tension on account of tariffs, import restrictions, and diplomatic disputes.

In fact, India, the latest entrant to the Pax Silica, was another global player which got hurt by Uncle Sam’s strong-arming tactics. It resulted in the Narendra Modi-led government increasing its engagement with the BRICS (supposed rival of the G7), while increasing economic engagement with China and Russia.

So, even if we take into consideration the fact that the above-mentioned incidents were results of short-term policy blips from the White House, the fact remains, there are players like India, Canada and Europe, who believe in the concept of a ’multi-polar world’, where instead of overcommitting to one particular geopolitical block, interest-driven approach will rule foreign policy and diplomacy.

Scissors said, “India is big enough to stand on its own, but only if it pursues reforms much more aggressively. Labour laws continue to favour existing workers, with the result that new workers cannot contribute properly to the economy. The demographic boom is being repressed. Smaller, but still sizable economies, should place their long-term bets on the US. America has pulled away from China in GDP over the past decade, and has a history, at least, of being open to its partners. However, these countries should also protect themselves from US policy shifts over the next three years.”

“All these middle powers are aligning or re-aligning with one or other superpowers. Global South nations are forming new trade alliances and partnerships that sidestep the US and the EU. India’s changing approach towards FTAs and partnering with new economies, like Australia and the UAE, shows its participation in bloc-based trade realignment,” Rahul Nath concluded.

The post Pax Silica: The new global order appeared first on International Finance.

Asialink has been a market leader in the Philippines’ finance industry for 28 years, supporting MSMEs, the backbone of the economy. Its financing solutions specifically cater to small, individually run enterprises and growing women-led businesses, enabling sustainable growth while addressing the ever-changing financing needs of their MSMEs. The recognition by the International Finance Awards, along with other global honours, further demonstrates the quality of the company’s services, which present inclusivity and excellence in supporting MSMEs through innovation, reach, and measurable economic impact.

Samuel Cariño, President and CEO of the Asialink Finance Corporation, said, “As a company committed to delivering accessible and reliable financial solutions, we are honoured to be recognised as the Best SME Finance Company and Best Auto Financing Company. These recognitions are not just milestones; they reflect our purpose and mission to empower Filipino entrepreneurs and individuals. They also serve as motivation to continue raising the bar, innovating our services, and exploring new ways to support the growth of our clients and communities. As we continue to expand our reach, we remain steadfast in our mission to innovate, serve with integrity, and help more Filipinos move forward with confidence.”

The company’s recognitions reflect years of consistent effort to bridge financing gaps, particularly for underserved segments facing limited access to formal credit. By December 2025, the company had released P16.6 billion in loans, a figure expected to grow steadily in 2026, highlighting strong demand and sustained trust from the Filipino communities the business serves.

A key pillar of Asialink’s SME strategy has been inclusive finance, particularly through initiatives supporting women entrepreneurs. The company launched the Women’s Access to Inclusive Support (WAIS) Loan, a programme providing financial tools for women-led enterprises in the Philippines to scale operations, manage challenges, and create long-term impact.

“We’ve seen how women entrepreneurs continue to push forward even in the most challenging times. Their strength, grit, and passion drive their own success and the growth of communities around them. Supporting women in business means investing in progress that uplifts families and fuels the nation’s economy,” Samuel Cariño told the International Finance.

Asialink recognises that many entrepreneurs build businesses to support families, strengthen communities, and create opportunities. By offering flexible, customer-centric financing, the company enables MSMEs to pursue growth that’s both economically viable and socially responsible.

“This year has been monumental for us at Asialink—marked by major milestones, meaningful partnerships, and the continued trust of the communities we serve. From empowering MSMEs and women entrepreneurs to celebrating industry recognition, our achievements are made possible by the dedication of our team and the confidence of our clients and partners,” the CEO noted.

Looking ahead, Asialink plans to expand its influence and impact across the region. According to Eleanor Yap, the company’s Chief Operating Officer (COO), Asialink will sustain momentum through strategic expansion, digital transformation, and people’s development.

“Asialink plans to maintain and grow its influence by exploring new markets and sectors, strengthening engagement with clients and partners, and continuously investing in technology and our people. This recognition inspires us to improve our systems further, introduce initiatives that support sustainable development, and empower businesses to thrive,” Eleanor Yap remarked.

Asialink’s recognition accentuates its continued role as a trusted partner to growing businesses and individuals. The company remains focused on making financing more accessible and relevant, helping MSMEs move forward and creating a positive impact for entrepreneurs, communities, and the economy they support.

The post Asialink: Empowering sustainable SME growth through inclusive finance appeared first on International Finance.