Author: workdigital2701@gmail.com

The EU is readying a fresh round of sanctions against Russia after leaders threatened Moscow with “massive” economic punishment for not agreeing a ceasefire in Ukraine.

But after 17 packages of sanctions since the Kremlin’s 2022 invasion, is there much more the bloc can do?All this punishment has not collapsed Russia’s economy or made its fearsome military machine grind to a halt.

But officials insist it is having a painful impact on the Kremlin.

“Russia’s economy is not doing well,” said EU top diplomat Kaja Kallas.

“Now they cannot even cover it up with the propaganda anymore, and they are saying that it is in stagnation.”

Critics — particularly in hawkish countries close to Russia — complain that the sanctions are leaky and components used by Moscow’s military still manage to reach Russia.

Since Russian tanks rolled over Ukraine’s border some three years ago, the EU has sought to hurt Moscow’s war effort with unprecedented sanctions.

Those range from visa bans and asset freezes on over 2,400 individuals and entities, including President Vladimir Putin, to an almost-complete ban on importing Russian crude oil, and freezing over 200 billion euros of its central bank assets.

A 17th round of sanctions was adopted on Tuesday blacklisting some 200 tankers in the “shadow fleet” used by Moscow to circumvent restrictions on oil exports.As Putin stalls on Ukraine peace efforts, Brussels is already working on an 18th round of sanctions.

European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said the measures would notably target the defunct Baltic Sea gas pipelines Nord Stream 1 and 2, to pre-empt any attempt to bring them back online.

The new sanctions would also seek to list more shadow fleet vessels, lower the price cap set on Russian oil, and slap additional measures on Russia’s financial sector, she said.For now, these hardly seem the “massive” measures promised that could force Putin to play ball.

Diplomats insist there remain major pressure points where the EU could hit Russia.

“Energy, energy, energy,” said one senior official when asked how to make Moscow pay attention.

“We have to go bold,” agreed a second EU diplomat. “There’s enough air still in the balloon that we can use.”Measures mentioned include rushing forward plans to end imports of Russian liquefied natural gas, targeting Moscow’s state nuclear giant Rosatom and further stifling oil exports.

But many of these sanctions have been proposed — and rejected — already as different member states have issued vetoes.

Diplomats have complained it is becoming increasingly difficult to agree on areas to hit Moscow, a task made even tougher by the growing stubbornness of Russia-friendly Hungary.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga on Tuesday called for a reduction in an oil price cap to 30 dollars a barrel, but that is a measure that needs to be agreed by the G7 group of leading nations.There have also been calls for the EU to seize Russia’s frozen central bank assets, mainly held in Belgium, but that has faced opposition from a raft of countries.Part of the motivation for European leaders to threaten Russia with major sanctions — in step with the UK which unveiled new measures this week — appears to have been to get US President Donald Trump to follow suit.

That appears to have failed, as Trump sidestepped the issue after a two-hour call this week with Putin that did not yield a ceasefire.

US Senator Lindsey Graham has put forward a proposal in Congress that could see 500-percent tariffs slapped on countries buying oil from Russia.

For now that effort is on hold — but it has drawn interest from some in Europe as a potential model for action.

EU diplomats say however that such a move is not envisioned on their side at the moment.Weakening the EU’s position is the possibility that Hungary could refuse to extend the bloc’s entire battery of sanctions on Russia when they come up for renewal later in the year.

Diplomats say work is going on to come up with alternatives to keep the sanctions in force.

That could involve getting individual countries to transpose sanctions onto their own law books or turning them into trade measures that Budapest cannot veto.

But for now Brussels is keeping mum on its plans.

There is no Indian Economic Zone in Bangladesh’s Mirsarai Economic Zone and the idea of having one exists only on “pen and paper”, Bangladesh Industrial Development Authority (BIDA) Chairman Ashik Chowdhury has said, amid a strain in ties between the two countries.

Earlier, the Bangladesh Economic Zone Authority (BEZA) had welcomed Indian investment in the Indian Economic Zone project in Mirsarai, a town in Chattogram district in the neighbouring country. In 2020, India had approved $115 million in principle under the third line of credit to support the project with an aim to create infrastructure on a 900-acre of land in the Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Industrial City.”I know there is confusion over whether in the Mirsarai Economic Zone, there is an Indian Economic Zone or not. If you look at the original master plan of the Mirsarai Economic Zone, the plan was for 33,000 acres. We have cut down that in Phase 1 and reduced it to 10,000 to 15,000 acres. I believe that we do not need so much space. We can look at the rest in the second or the third phase,” Mr Chowdhury said.What is usually said about the Indian Economic Zone, that is only an economic zone on pen and paper. This was there in the original master plan but there was no progress or significant work done on this. The area marked in the master plan is a forest area. Practically, there is no progress or set up there, so there is a lot of misconception about this in the public domain. I had clarified earlier and I am clarifying again that there is no activity that has happened there,” he added. The BIDA Chairman said that after the Muhammad Yunus-led interim government took charge in August last year, there was no progress on the project. “It is a complete pause or in a postponement position… The Chittagong Port is not just Chittagong’s port. It is entire Bangladesh’s port, and we are saying it is for the entire South Asia and even the seven sisters and Nepal and Bhutan. For everyone, it is primary,” he said.

The BIDA official’s remarks came amid declining relations between India and Bangladesh since last year, after the latter failed to contain attacks on minorities, especially Hindus, in the country. Bilateral ties further nosedived after Dhaka’s pitch to China on Northeast India earlier this year, prompting New Delhi to impose a slew of curbs on that country.In March, Bangladesh interim government’s Chief Advisor Mohammad Yunus said Dhaka is the “only guardian of the ocean” for landlocked Northeast India, evoking a sharp reaction from New Delhi and its political leaders. 

On April 9, India withdrew the transhipment facility it had granted to Bangladesh for exporting various items to the Middle East, Europe and various other countries, except Nepal and Bhutan. Days later on April 13, yarn exports from India across landports were stopped and Indian shipments were subjected to rigorous inspections on entry to Bangladesh. On May 17, India imposed port restrictions on the import of certain goods, such as readymade garments and processed food items, from Bangladesh, in response to similar curbs placed by Dhaka on certain Indian products last month. Reacting to Mr Yunus’s remarks, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said: “…No country should be under the impression that it can take over the Chicken’s Neck. The World has seen India’s military prowess during Operation Sindoor.” 

The Chicken’s Neck, known as the Siliguri Corridor, is a narrow strip of land, measuring around 22 km-35 km in width, that connects the northeast region with the rest of India.

“We have one Chicken’s Neck. But Bangladesh has two Chicken Necks. If Bangladesh attacks our Chicken’s Neck, we will attack both the Chicken Necks of Bangladesh,” Mr Sarma said, referring to a narrow corridor that connects the rest of Bangladesh to Chittagong, its largest port city. Chittagong has seen trouble in the past and Bangladesh seems to suggest that India’s Northeast is solely dependent on access to the Chittagong port.

India  has already announced a new four-lane highway from Shillong in Meghalaya to Silchar in Assam. 

The Kaladan Multi Modal Transit Transport Project in Myanmar is set to connect the Kolkata port to Sittwe port on the Kaladan river in Rakhine state. The Sittwe port will be connected to Paletwa in Myanmar through an inland waterway, the Kaladan River and finally to Zorinpui on the southernmost tip of Mizoram, through a road section. Once Mizoram is connected to Sittwe, the rest of the Northeast can easily access the sea.

India has become the fourth largest economy in the world, overtaking Japan, NITI Aayog CEO BVR Subrahmanyam said on Saturday.

Briefing reporters after the 10th Governing Council meeting of Niti Aayog, Mr Subrahmanyam said the overall geopolitical and economic environment is favourable to India.

“We are the fourth largest economy as I speak. We are a USD 4 trillion economy as I speak,” he said.

Citing IMF data, mR Subrahmanyam said India today is larger than Japan.

“It is only the US, China and Germany which are larger than India, and if we stick to what is being planned and what is being thought through, in 2.5-3 years, we will be the third largest economy,” Mr Subrahmanyam.Responding to a question on US President Donald Trump’s recent statement that he expects Apple iPhones that will be sold in the US to be manufactured in America and not India, or anyplace else, Mr Subrahmanyam said, “What the tariff will be, is uncertain. Given the dynamics, we will be cheap place to manufacture.”He also said that a second round of asset monetisation pipeline is being prepared and it will be announced in August. Dr. Diano’s early years at the University of the Visayas laid the foundation for a dynamic career. He taught math with a real-world focus, but as Research Coordinator for five years, he expanded his impact, leading 50+ faculty projects, launching collaborative systems, and boosting published output by over 30%.

He later served as Principal, Campus Administrator, and OIC Dean. He turned vision into action with data-driven assessments, teacher mentoring, and team-based strategies that improved student outcomes and school culture.

From classroom to campus, Dr. Diano leads where strategy meets empathy.

Even if the United States were to impose a 25 per cent tariff on iPhones manufactured in India, the total production cost would still be much lower if compared with manufacturing the devices in the U.S, according to a report by Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI).

This comes amid a statement by U.S. President Donald Trump, threatening to impose 25 per cent tariffs on iPhones if Apple decides to make it in India. However, the GTRI report showed that manufacturing in India remains cost-effective, despite such duties.

The report breaks down the current value chain of a $1,000 (roughly Rs. 83,400) iPhone, which involves contributions from over a dozen countries. Apple retains the largest share of the value, about $450 (roughly Rs. 37,530) per device, through its brand, software, and design.It also added that the U.S. component makers, such as Qualcomm and Broadcom, add $80 (roughly Rs. 6,672), while Taiwan contributes $150 (roughly Rs. 12,510) through chip manufacturing. South Korea adds $90 (roughly Rs. 7,506) via OLED screens and memory chips, and Japan supplies components worth $85 (roughly Rs. 7,089), mainly through camera systems. Germany, Vietnam, and Malaysia account for another $45 (roughly Rs. 3,753) through smaller parts.

GTRI stated that China and India, despite being major players of iPhone assembly, earn only around $30 (roughly Rs. 2,502) per device. This is less than 3 per cent of the total retail price of an iPhone.

The report argues that manufacturing iPhones in India is still economically viable even if a 25 per cent tariff is applied.This is mainly because of the sharp difference in labour costs between India and the U.S. In India, assembly workers earn approximately $230 (roughly Rs. 19,182) per month, while in the U.S. states like California, labour costs could soar to around $2,900 (roughly Rs. 2,41,860) per month due to minimum wage laws, a 13-fold increase.As a result, assembling an iPhone in India costs about $30 (roughly Rs. 2,502), while the same process in the U.S. would cost around $390 (roughly Rs. 32,526). In addition to this Apple gets the benefit of production-linked incentive (PLI) on iPhone manufacturing in India from government.

If Apple were to shift production to the U.S., its profit per iPhone could fall drastically from $450 (roughly Rs. 37,530) to just $60 (roughly Rs. 5,004), unless retail prices are significantly increased.

United States President Donald Trump’s tariffs against most of the world tanked stock markets, disrupted the U.S. bond market and destabilized the global economy.

Trump has economically and politically threatened American allies, shattering the unity of the western world. But Trump’s chaos may have inadvertently produced an opportunity to create a better world.

Some western commentators argue that the U.S. has been a benevolent superpower.

That may have been true for a small group of mostly western states that have benefitted from American domination. But much of the Global South was victimized by American military, economic and political interventions.The West could be in the midst of losing its dominant position in the global order. This is probably inevitable, but it may not be the tragedy some western commentators assume it to be.

In most of the world, there is a desire for a more equitable world order that doesn’t feature the moral, racial and cultural double standards of the western-dominated system. A world where American and western power is limited and contained could not only end up being more peaceful but, over time, more prosperous.

Without the co-operation of the allies alienated by Trump, it may be harder for the U.S. to initiate conflict around the world as it often has since the end of the Cold War.In a recent Foreign Affairs article, American political scientist Stacie Goddard argues the emerging multipolar, post-American world will be one in which great powers — primarily the U.S., Russia and China — will divide the globe into “spheres of influence.”

The U.S. is seeking to maintain disproportionate power in Asia. Closer to home, neighbours of the U.S. have reason to fear American expansionism.

By contrast, even if it has imperialist ambitions, Russia doesn’t have the military might to dominate Europe. It’s a country of 144 million people with one-sixth the GDP of the European Union. Russia can cause trouble within countries with sizable Russian minorities, but its ability to project power is limited, as demonstrated by its grinding war in Ukraine.The Chinese have scored a win against Trump’s tariffs with a 90-day tariff pause that’s being hailed as vindication of China’s defiant negotiating strategy. China called Trump’s bluff and won as global stocks soared.

This has bolstered China’s goal to have a sphere of influence. However, Chinese foreign policy is largely non-interventionist and, compared to the U.S., remarkably restrained.

China may intimidate its rivals in the South China Sea, Senkaku Islands, and Taiwan, but it does not easily resort to military force. China has not resorted to military force since its war with Vietnam in 1979.

China is committed to most of the guiding structures of the current international system and values a stable and mutually beneficial global economic order that enables it to focus on and improve its domestic development.Its export-oriented economic sectors need customers abroad. Unlike the West, China has a vested interest in helping the Global South develop and prosper in order to create those customers.

Asian trade alliance?

The Chinese are using their resources to promote economic and technological development in the Global South.

As China spreads its renewable energy technologies globally, some of the poorest countries may leapfrog carbon-based fuels and go directly to renewable energy to make development affordable and attainable, and to mitigate climate change.In response to Trump’s tariffs, China, South Korea and Japan have discussed a renewed free-trade arrangement. President Xi Jinping has toured Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia to encourage a common front against American actions.

Asian states are wary of China, but they remain committed to global trade. The U.S. may be retreating from globalization, but the rest of the world is not, though China’s manufacturing dominance concerns many states.

Emerging international order

New institutions may help to manage the evolving world order. The BRICS countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates — have created the New Development Bank (NDB). China has created the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).The United Nations remains the favoured instrument of global diplomacy, even if western states have been accused of undermining its authority and efficacy.

The European Union will continue as a major global power in the emerging international order, but on a more even footing with the rest of the world.

Europe is reconsidering its trade war with China. In the words of Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission: “The West as we knew it no longer exists.”

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!