http://srmtoday.makes.news/SRM Today Spotlight RSS feedhttp://www.rssboard.org/rss-specificationenThu, 16 Apr 2026 15:53:19 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/14/imf-and-world-bank-warn-of-worsening-global-economic-fallout-from-iran-conflict-and-energy-disruptions<p>At the Washington meetings, policymakers express concern over the combined effects of Iran conflict, rising energy costs, and market volatility on vulnerable economies, highlighting the urgent need for coordinated support.</p><p>The IMF and World Bank meetings in Washington have been dominated by the fallout from the war in Iran, with policymakers treating the conflict less as a distant geopolitical shock than as an immediate economic threat. According to a joint statement released on 13 April by the heads of the International Energy Agency, the IMF and the World Bank Group, disruption in oil, gas and fertiliser markets is already raising concerns about food security, inflation and job losses, especially in poorer countries that depend heavily on imported energy.</p> <p>The sharpest anxiety centres on the Strait of Hormuz, through which a large share of global energy supplies move. The institutions said uncertainty over the normalisation of shipping routes is adding to market volatility, while higher fuel and fertiliser costs are feeding through to food prices and worsening conditions for energy-importing low-income economies. That is particularly painful for countries in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, where external financing pressures and heavy debt burdens have left governments with little room to absorb another terms-of-trade shock, according to reports from the meetings.</p> <p>For the World Bank, the crisis has also sharpened its argument that energy access is not just a climate issue but a development one. At a spring meetings event focused on growth and jobs through energy, the bank said reliable and affordable power is essential for business activity, productivity and employment. It has been promoting projects to modernise grids and diversify energy systems, including its Mission 300 effort to connect 300 million Africans to electricity by 2030.</p> <p>Yet the conflict has complicated the climate debate rather than settled it. Higher fossil-fuel prices can make renewable energy look more competitive, but they also make investment conditions more uncertain and raise the cost of capital across emerging markets. Semafor reported that some discussions in Washington turned to whether financial institutions should soften restrictions around fossil-fuel lending, reflecting pressure from the United States to rethink how climate risk is weighed in debt sustainability and fiscal policy.</p> <p>For the IMF and World Bank, the immediate task is to keep countries afloat while the shock works its way through global markets. In their joint statement, the three institutions said they will monitor developments closely and coordinate responses to support a resilient recovery. For now, the mood in Washington is one of caution: energy security, inflation and debt distress are no longer separate files, but part of the same crisis.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69ddbd725321b6a81bf850a2Tue, 14 Apr 2026 22:44:23 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/14/strait-of-hormuz-conflict-triggers-global-ripple-effects-on-trade-and-energy-prices<p>Escalating tensions at the Strait of Hormuz are disrupting shipping, inflating fuel costs, and weakening economic growth prospects worldwide, as businesses and officials brace for prolonged instability.</p><p>The escalation around the Strait of Hormuz is rippling far beyond the Middle East, with economists, shippers and energy officials warning that the fallout is already feeding through to prices, trade flows and business planning.</p> <p>At a briefing at the Port of Los Angeles, Jerrold D. Green, a senior fellow on the Middle East and South Asia, said the conflict had altered the strategic environment in ways that would not be easily reversed. He described the situation as global rather than regional, arguing that businesses were being forced to make decisions in an atmosphere of deep uncertainty. Port chief executive Gene Seroka said the disruption was already affecting shipping costs and cargo movements, even if freight arriving at the West Coast port had so far held near seasonal norms.</p> <p>The main pressure point remains the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important energy corridors. Before the war, roughly 100 to 110 vessels passed through the waterway each day, carrying a significant share of global oil trade. Since the fighting began, thousands of ships have been unable to move east or west through the route, and Seroka said the price of fuel for cargo vessels had doubled in six weeks. Consumers are also feeling the effect through higher petrol prices, with AAA reporting that the US national average had risen sharply from pre-war levels.</p> <p>The wider impact is now showing up in official forecasts. The International Monetary Fund has cut its global growth outlook for 2026, warning that the conflict has disrupted economic momentum and revived inflationary pressures. The fund said its forecast assumes the fighting remains relatively contained and oil prices stabilise, but it also cautioned that the recovery could prove more difficult than after the 2022 energy shock.</p> <p>Energy demand is also being revised lower. The International Energy Agency now expects global oil demand to fall in 2026, the first such decline since the pandemic, as higher prices curb consumption and supply disruptions continue to bite. The agency said shipments through Hormuz have fallen dramatically from pre-war levels, and it has not ruled out further releases from strategic reserves.</p> <p>Retailers in the United States are not direct buyers of much Middle Eastern merchandise, but supply chain groups say the region still matters because global logistics are tightly interconnected. Jonathan Gold of the National Retail Federation said rerouted vessels, displaced equipment, higher fuel bills and rising pump prices all feed into the same system, leaving consumers with less spending power.</p> <p>Green warned that the disruption could last well beyond the fighting itself. Rebuilding damaged infrastructure, he said, would be more expensive because future projects would need stronger protection. He also pointed to knock-on effects for pharmaceutical production, remittance flows from Gulf workers and energy supplies in Asia, where countries such as Vietnam rely heavily on fuel moving through the strait.</p> <p>For now, Port of Los Angeles officials say trans-Pacific trade continues to move without major interruption, helped by shipping terminals in the Middle East keeping cargo segmented and flowing. But with the diplomatic track stalled, military tensions unresolved and energy markets still on edge, businesses are bracing for a longer period of instability.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69ddbd725321b6a81bf85084Tue, 14 Apr 2026 22:44:17 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/06/imf-warns-escalation-of-middle-east-conflict-threatens-global-economic-stability<p>The International Monetary Fund highlights the far-reaching economic impacts of the Middle East war, warning of rising energy prices, disrupted supply chains, and increased financial stress that threaten vulnerable nations and global growth.</p><p>The International Monetary Fund says the war in the Middle East is already transmitting a costly shock to the world economy and risks ushering in a period of slower output alongside higher prices, with the poorest nations likely to suffer most.</p> <p>In a blog post on its website, the IMF set out three principal channels through which the conflict is hurting global activity: severely curtailed energy flows, interrupted trade and supply chains, and heightened financial market stress. According to the IMF, disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz , a key transit corridor for crude and liquefied natural gas , have driven a marked tightening of global energy markets, lifting fuel costs for governments, businesses and households in energy-importing economies and eroding purchasing power more broadly.</p> <p>The fund warned that spillovers go well beyond hydrocarbons. Rerouting of shipping to avoid the conflict zone has pushed up freight and insurance charges and lengthened delivery times, while shipments of fertiliser and other agricultural inputs that pass through the Gulf are at risk. The IMF said any sustained squeeze on fertiliser supplies could dent harvests and elevate food prices, a development that would hit low-income countries disproportionately because they spend a larger share of income on food.</p> <p>Financial contagion is adding to the strain. The fund pointed to falling equity markets, higher borrowing costs and tighter cross-border financing conditions, noting that many emerging and low-income countries entered the episode already carrying heavy debt burdens and limited fiscal headroom. That combination, the IMF argued, constrains governments’ ability to shield vulnerable populations from rising import bills and currency pressures.</p> <p>IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva has warned that a protracted conflict could test global economic resilience, broadening the squeeze on growth and inflation and complicating policy responses. The fund said it is preparing to scale up financing and advisory support for countries most at risk and will publish a fuller assessment in its forthcoming economic reports in April.</p> <p>Independent energy authorities have sounded an even sharper alarm. According to the International Energy Agency, the near-paralysis of the Strait of Hormuz represents an unprecedented threat to global energy security; IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol called it "the greatest global energy security threat in history." The agency estimates current disruptions have removed millions of barrels of oil and substantial volumes of gas from world markets and has deployed the largest emergency release of oil reserves in its history to temper the shock. The IEA also warned that interruptions are affecting chemicals and critical industrial inputs beyond fuel and urged conservation measures and other responses to blunt the immediate impact.</p> <p>Several analysts and commentators have flagged the risk of stagflation , the combination of stagnant growth and persistent inflation , as higher energy and food costs feed through to wider price-setting. The IMF cautioned that if elevated prices become entrenched in expectations, central banks will face more difficult trade-offs between reining in inflation and supporting activity.</p> <p>Policy prescriptions from the IMF emphasise targeted, temporary measures to protect the most vulnerable while preserving medium-term fiscal sustainability. The fund urged countries with room to manoeuvre to consider direct support for poor households and firms most exposed to energy and food price shocks, while calling on international partners to step up financing for low-income states facing balance-of-payments pressures.</p> <p>The trajectory of the shock will hinge on the duration and geographic spread of the conflict, the IMF noted. If tensions ease and transit routes reopen, the acute phase could abate; if not, economists warn of deeper and longer-lasting damage, particularly in regions reliant on imported energy and fertilisers. The IMF and other agencies have pledged continued monitoring and further analysis as conditions evolve.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69d1df520c854ff7462eb5faMon, 06 Apr 2026 09:51:44 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/06/ryanair-warns-of-potential-flight-cuts-as-iran-conflict-threatens-fuel-supplies<p>Ryanair warns that ongoing conflict centred on Iran could lead to significant flight cancellations this summer, as rising oil prices and supply disruptions threaten European airline schedules amid geopolitical tensions.</p><p>Ryanair has warned that a prolonged conflict centred on Iran could force substantial cuts to European flight schedules this summer, with the airline’s chief executive saying up to a tenth of services might be axed if jet‑fuel supplies tighten.</p> <p>Speaking to ITV News, Michael O’Leary said: "We're all facing an unknown scenario. And we are certainly looking at maybe having to cancel 5%, 10% of flights through May, June and July." He repeated similar concerns on Sky News, adding: "Fuel suppliers are constantly looking at the market. We don't expect any disruption until early May, but if the war continues, we do run the risk of supply disruptions in Europe in May and June, and we hope the war will finish sooner than that and the risk to supply will be eliminated." He also said: "If the war finishes by April and the Strait of Hormuz reopens, then there is almost no risk to supply."</p> <p>Industry observers say the disruption stems from rising oil prices and restricted tanker movements after the Strait of Hormuz , a conduit for roughly one fifth of global seaborne oil , was effectively closed. According to analysis in The Irish Times, Ryanair has hedged about 80% of its fuel requirements at lower rates, leaving roughly 20% exposed to market volatility, while the company has opted to postpone further hedging decisions until the end of June in the hope of greater price clarity.</p> <p>The move to delay new hedges reflects a wider caution within aviation. The Irish Times reported that several carriers are holding off fresh fuel‑price protection amid highly unpredictable markets, and other low‑cost airlines have already started trimming schedules. Spanish news outlet AS noted capacity reductions and cancellations at rivals including Wizz Air, easyJet and Volotea as operators respond to mounting costs.</p> <p>Smaller operators have felt the impact sooner. According to reporting in the Mirror, regional carrier Skybus cancelled all scheduled services from 3 April citing the spike in fuel costs and a decline in bookings, describing the combination as an "insurmountable barrier" to continuing flights on a publicly funded route.</p> <p>Ryanair has urged travellers to book early to avoid higher fares if capacity is cut. Fortune quoted O’Leary advising passengers to secure summer trips promptly to lock in lower prices, while stressing that most flights would still operate even if some reductions are needed.</p> <p>The situation presents a delicate balancing act for airlines: passing higher costs to customers risks depressing demand further, but absorbing price rises would hit margins already under pressure. Government figures and market data will be watched closely in the coming weeks as carriers decide whether to adjust timetables for May and June, or to accept steeper ticket prices to maintain schedules.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69d330aa2fae15c739bbc852Mon, 06 Apr 2026 09:51:15 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/06/white-house-s-new-tariffs-threaten-australian-pharmaceutical-exports<p>The US government's recent move to incentivise domestic drug manufacturing through high tariffs could disrupt Australian medicine exports and reshape global supply chains amid ongoing trade tensions.</p><p>The White House has unveiled sweeping new measures aimed at shifting the production of patented medicines back to US soil, a move that threatens to hit Australian exporters among others.</p> <p>According to the Associated Press, President Donald Trump on April 2, 2026 signed an executive order imposing tariffs that can reach 100% on certain branded pharmaceuticals manufactured abroad if companies do not secure pricing deals with his administration. The order sets out a tiered regime: companies that both agree to preferred pricing arrangements and build domestic manufacturing could avoid the levy entirely, those that commit to onshore production but not the pricing deals would face a reduced 20% tariff, and the full 100% rate would apply to firms that neither strike an agreement nor begin building in the United States. The AP reported that large drugmakers will have 120 days to present “reshoring” plans, with smaller firms given 180 days before duties take effect.</p> <p>The policy is being defended by the administration as addressing a national security risk created by heavy reliance on foreign drug-supply chains. The move follows earlier Trump pressures that led a group of manufacturers to accept “most-favoured-nation” pricing arrangements, Axios notes, and aims to further leverage import taxes to force lower US prices and domestic investment. Axios also reported the campaign will primarily target production hubs such as China, India and Singapore, while other jurisdictions have already negotiated lighter levies.</p> <p>Australian industry faces immediate exposure. Government data and reporting show Australian pharmaceutical shipments to the United States amount to roughly US$1.6 billion annually. Australian-made medicines will therefore be among those most affected unless their producers either relocate manufacturing to the US or secure the price concessions the administration is seeking. ABC News documented earlier threats from the administration that the levy would apply from October 1 and recalled prior warnings that punitive duties might be as high as 200% if companies did not move production.</p> <p>Not all countries are treated the same under the new measures. The White House has carved out lower tariff rates for some partners: the lead reporting and subsequent coverage indicate Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and the United Kingdom have negotiated reduced levels in the low teens, and European Union countries may also see preferential treatment, depending on existing trade arrangements.</p> <p>The Australian government has pushed back on suggestions that it will relax domestic medicine-price protections to placate the United States. According to The Guardian, Health Minister Mark Butler has said Canberra will not remove the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme’s negotiating protections for consumers. SBS reported similar sentiments, warning the tariffs will create uncertainty for exporters but stressing there is no intention to weaken price controls that keep medicines affordable in Australia.</p> <p>The White House framed the tariffs as part of a broader effort to rebalance global pharmaceutical pricing, arguing that many foreign purchasing systems, where governments negotiate directly with manufacturers, mean US patients pay more. Industry groups and exporting nations are likely to contest the policy on legal and economic grounds; observers note that the administration is relying on trade-law provisions tied to national security rather than the emergency powers the Supreme Court recently constrained in litigation over prior tariff actions.</p> <p>If companies respond by relocating production or by striking the pricing deals the administration demands, the policy could reshape global supply chains and pricing models. If they do not, Australian exporters and others that rely on foreign production will face steep barriers to the US market.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69d330aa2fae15c739bbc848Mon, 06 Apr 2026 09:50:15 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/06/ukrainian-strikes-undermine-russias-oil-revenue-amid-baltic-explosions-and-export-disruptions<p>Ukrainian missile and drone attacks on Russia’s key Baltic oil terminals and infrastructure are significantly impairing Moscow’s ability to capitalise on rising global crude prices, threatening its economic stability amid ongoing conflict.</p><p>Burning storage tanks and columns of smoke over the Baltic have undercut what looked set to be a lucrative windfall for Moscow, as Ukrainian strikes on Russia’s oil-export infrastructure blunt the Kremlin’s ability to capitalise on a surge in crude prices.</p> <p>According to the t-online report, prices for Russia’s Urals grade briefly climbed above $120 a barrel in early April after disruptions in the Middle East pushed global benchmarks sharply higher. Those market moves briefly translated into unexpectedly large export proceeds for Russia; t-online cites an estimate that Moscow earned about $6.9 billion in additional oil revenues in the first two weeks of March alone, aided by a temporary US waiver on sanctions covering cargoes already at sea through 11 April.</p> <p>But Kyiv has stepped up a deliberate campaign to deny Moscow those gains by striking facilities that handle exports. Le Monde reports that Ukrainian long-range drones have repeatedly hit key Baltic terminals, including Ust-Luga and Primorsk, Russia’s largest oil export terminal, and struck Novorossiysk on the Black Sea, as well as refineries and related infrastructure. Those attacks have produced major fires, damaged port equipment and forced suspension of loading operations, according to the French newspaper.</p> <p>The practical effect has been substantial. Industry reporting compiled by Maritime Professional indicates that attacks on pipelines, terminals and refineries have cut Russian export capacity by roughly one million barrels per day, about 5% of the country’s output, a scale of disruption likely to depress production over time. Bloomberg reporting, summarised by UNN, found that port shipments fell to around a third of the previous week’s level following repeated strikes, costing Moscow in excess of $1 billion in lost revenues during that period.</p> <p>Ukrainian officials frame the strikes as a financial chokehold intended to prevent oil proceeds from sustaining Russia’s war effort. AP notes that Kyiv has also used domestically developed long-range drones to reach targets inside Russia, including oil terminals in Novorossiysk, and said such operations aim to curtail export income that could underwrite further aggression. Russia, for its part, claims many Ukrainian drones were intercepted during recent nights of fighting.</p> <p>Analysts caution the campaign’s ultimate impact requires sustained pressure. Research from the Baker Institute stresses that while crude export volumes were largely steady through 2025, exports of refined products began to decline, prompting Russian authorities to restrict some product shipments temporarily. Breaking Defense quoted EU officials describing the strikes as “painful” to the Russian economy, noting rising logistical costs and greater uncertainty for oil flows.</p> <p>The balance of forces on global markets is now more complex than a simple price shock from geopolitics. Le Monde observed that before the escalation linked to tensions in the Middle East, Brent traded around $70 a barrel; with prices now above $100, Ukraine’s strikes have limited the extent to which Moscow can convert higher prices into durable fiscal gains. At the same time, Russia cites stockpiles afloat and alternative routing through Pacific ports to mitigate losses, underscoring competing assessments of resilience and damage.</p> <p>For Moscow the risk is twofold: immediate revenue shortfalls from disrupted shipments and longer-term increases in the cost and vulnerability of its export system, which could erode flexibility in financing state priorities. Kyiv’s intensified targeting of export hubs represents a strategic attempt to translate battlefield pressure into economic strain, and industry and intelligence assessments suggest that if the campaign continues, it will deepen the strain on Russia’s oil-dependent finances.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69d330aa2fae15c739bbc83eMon, 06 Apr 2026 09:49:33 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/06/oil-prices-surge-as-us-iran-tensions-threaten-strait-of-hormuz-stability<p>Global oil markets spike amid US threats and Iran's refusal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, raising fears of a broader energy crisis and higher fuel costs worldwide.</p><p>Global oil markets spiked on Monday after President Donald Trump issued a hardline ultimatum aimed at Iran over the Strait of Hormuz, fuelling fears of further disruption to supplies that traverse the chokepoint.</p> <p>According to NDTV Profit, Brent crude climbed above $110 a barrel while the U.S. benchmark WTI neared $113 as traders priced in the risk that access through the strait could remain restricted. Market participants said the moves reflected a sharp reassessment of near‑term physical tightness across crude and refined products.</p> <p>Trump's post demanding that Iran reopen the strait by a set deadline and threatening strikes on Iranian infrastructure prompted the immediate reaction. The Daily Beast reported that his message warned Iran it would be "living in hell" if the waterway was not reopened, language that Tehran dismissed and said the strait would remain closed until compensation for war damage was secured. Axios noted that Trump had described an escalation that included naming days for attacks, calling Tuesday "Power Plant Day" and "Bridge Day" in a separate post on Truth Social.</p> <p>Iranian officials and parliamentarians publicly rejected the ultimatum, and shipping restrictions through the Hormuz corridor remained tight, with only selected vessels granted passage. The continued limitations have intensified concerns that a prolonged or expanded disruption would choke a route responsible for roughly a fifth of global seaborne oil and LNG flows.</p> <p>Analysts warned the supply shock could widen into a broader energy crisis. Eurasia Group analysts estimate a better‑than‑one‑in‑two chance the conflict persists into May and have suggested oil could reach $150 a barrel if Iranian attacks damage regional energy infrastructure; some scenarios cited by industry observers even place prices nearer $200 a barrel should the strait stay closed for an extended period. The International Energy Agency has urged governments to mobilise emergency measures as strategic reserves and in‑transit buffers are drawn down.</p> <p>Physical market indicators underlined the tightness. NDTV Profit reported that prompt spreads moved into steep backwardation, and dated Brent , a benchmark for deliverable cargoes , jumped above $140 a barrel, levels not seen since the 2008 spike. Traders said these signals point to an urgent scramble for immediate supplies rather than longer‑dated contracts.</p> <p>The regional fighting has already reached beyond Iran's borders. Axios reported drone strikes over the weekend struck oil‑related facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain, reinforcing fears that attacks could cascade through Gulf energy infrastructure. OPEC+ has cautioned that damage to facilities may have lasting consequences for output even after hostilities subside, and while the producer alliance has signalled higher official quotas, physical flows are constrained by damage, logistics and security risks.</p> <p>The economic implications are measurable: higher fuel costs are feeding inflationary pressures and threaten to sap growth in many economies. AP noted that Asian markets were mixed on Monday, with some indices gaining despite the uncertainty; Japan said it would tap reserves and explore alternative supply routes, while South Korea planned naval shipments to Saudi Arabia to diversify sources.</p> <p>Investors were also unsettled by mixed messaging from Washington. Axios highlighted that Trump has alternated between signalling negotiations and threatening military action, leaving markets to weigh both the likelihood and the potential scale of U.S. intervention. Legal scholars and some international voices have criticised the President's rhetoric; The Daily Beast reported commentators warning such threats risk breaching norms of international law if they target civilian infrastructure.</p> <p>With the conflict now in its sixth week and diplomatic channels active but fragile, market-watchers say volatility is likely to persist. Short‑term relief would depend on either a prompt reopening of Hormuz, a rapid de‑escalation, or coordinated releases from strategic reserves; absent those developments, analysts warn the near‑term path for oil prices remains sharply higher.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69d330aa2fae15c739bbc838Mon, 06 Apr 2026 09:49:20 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/03/white-house-s-new-tariffs-on-imported-medicines-aim-to-reshape-us-pharmaceutical-supply-chain<p>The US government unveils a plan to impose steep duties on certain imported branded medicines, seeking to boost domestic production and lower drug prices amid concerns over foreign dependence and supply chain disruptions.</p><p>The White House on Thursday unveiled a plan to levy steep duties on certain imported patented medicines as part of a bid to force greater domestic pharmaceutical production and win lower drug prices for US patients.</p> <p>According to Bloomberg, the executive action authorises tariffs of up to 100% on branded drugs manufactured in countries that do not have tariff arrangements with the United States when those products are sold by companies that have not agreed to most‑favoured‑nation pricing with the administration. The White House said duties on goods from some larger manufacturers will begin in 120 days, while imports from smaller firms will be subject to levies after 180 days. Bloomberg also reported that generic medicines are initially exempt but will be reviewed within a year, leaving open the prospect of future duties.</p> <p>The move largely preserves carve‑outs for firms that already struck deals with the administration. According to Axios, 13 major companies previously agreed to most‑favoured‑nation pricing arrangements after pressure from the White House, and those accords have shielded many big drugmakers from the new penalties. Stat News and other outlets noted that companies pledging to build manufacturing capacity in the United States can reduce the charge on their imports to 20%, and those that both onshore production and accept MFN pricing would pay no tariff. The White House described the tariff‑free window as lasting through the end of the current term; Bloomberg reported that exemption would remain in place through January 20, 2029, while the Irish Times cited a January 29, 2029, expiry in its account.</p> <p>The administration also set out national‑level caps for imports from economies that maintain trade arrangements with Washington: the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and Liechtenstein were identified as qualifying for a 15% cap, with Britain to face a lower rate, Reuters and Euronews reported. Euronews added that the UK government says it secured a temporary 0% rate for British medicines for at least three years.</p> <p>The tariffs emerge from a Commerce Department investigation launched in April 2025 under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, the law that permits the president to impose import restrictions on grounds of national security. AP noted that the order builds on longstanding White House rhetoric framing foreign dependence for drug supply as a security risk and comes on the anniversary of past large tariffs; AP also said the administration signalled a phased escalation that could see charges rise toward 100% over time if companies do not comply.</p> <p>Industry groups have warned of practical consequences. Trade and supply‑chain associations cautioned that steep import duties could disrupt complex global production networks, aggravate shortages and push costs higher for American consumers. The Los Angeles Times highlighted how drug pricing in the United States is determined through intricate negotiations among insurers, pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers, meaning any additional import costs may not translate immediately into higher shelf prices but could feed through to increased copayments or insurance premiums over time.</p> <p>Analysts put the potential scope of the policy into perspective. The Irish Times cited an estimate by Veda Partners suggesting the full 100% tariff might apply to roughly $12 billion of goods , under 5% of total US pharmaceutical imports in 2025 , indicating that, because of the exemptions and prior agreements, the heaviest penalties would fall mainly on smaller manufacturers and ingredient suppliers based in production hubs such as China, India and Singapore, as Axios observed.</p> <p>The administration’s action adds to a series of protectionist measures from the same White House. Legal challenges earlier this year saw the Supreme Court rule that certain global tariffs were unconstitutional, though duties imposed under Section 232 on other sectors remained intact. The new pharmaceutical measures sit alongside moves to tighten and simplify metal tariffs, signalling a broader trade posture that ties industrial policy and price‑setting leverage to domestic reshoring.</p> <p>For patients and payers, the immediate effects are uncertain. Observers quoted by Stat and the Los Angeles Times suggested that while the policy is intended to spur onshoring and reduce long‑term dependence on foreign production, in the near term companies will face a choice between absorbing higher import costs or seeking to pass them on through the health‑care system. The White House framed the package as a lever to secure lower prices and greater manufacturing investment in the United States; industry representatives and trade analysts warned it could complicate already fragile supply chains and raise costs before any domestic capacity expansion meaningfully alters markets.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cf3c3950400ed7b4914bf9Fri, 03 Apr 2026 22:21:26 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/03/us-revises-tariffs-on-derivative-metals-to-target-valuation-practices-without-easing-protectionism<p>President Donald Trump has announced amendments to the US national security tariffs on steel, aluminium and copper, aiming to crack down on undervaluation practices in derivative products while maintaining steep duties on raw materials, prompting industry and trade scrutiny.</p><p>President Donald Trump on Thursday revised national security tariffs on imports of steel, aluminium and copper, cutting duty rates for a range of downstream products while leaving intact steep levies on the raw metals, according to a White House announcement and a senior administration official.</p> <p>The proclamation preserves a 50% Section 232 tariff on commodity steel, aluminium and copper, but shifts how duties will be applied for derivative goods by basing charges on the prices paid by U.S. purchasers rather than import-entry values, the White House said. The administration said the change is intended to simplify compliance and curb what it described as a practice by some importers of understating customs values to reduce tariff bills.</p> <p>Details remain incomplete. It was not immediately specified how sales prices will be established or which transactional benchmarks customs will use to calculate the resulting tariffs, and the senior official acknowledged those operational specifics were still to be determined. According to Reuters reporting, the move affects derivative products made with the three metals while leaving the headline 50% rate on commodity shipments in place.</p> <p>Industry groups and trading partners are likely to scrutinise the practical effects. Importers facing higher declared values could see duty bills rise, while domestic manufacturers who use processed steel, aluminium and copper may encounter altered input costs depending on how the new price-based assessments are applied. Government figures and trade data show that valuation disputes have been a recurring source of contention at the border, and the administration framed the revision as an effort to reduce evasion and improve enforcement.</p> <p>The decision comes amid continuing debate over the use of national security tariffs under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Section 232 of the Trade Act of 1974, which have been employed in recent years to protect U.S. metal producers. According to Reuters, the administration’s adjustment focuses on downstream goods rather than rescinding or lowering the headline commodity tariffs, signalling a tighter interpretation of valuation rules rather than a rollback of protectionist policy.</p> <p>Market participants and customs experts will be watching for forthcoming guidance from the Treasury and Commerce departments that will be necessary to translate the proclamation into administrable rules. Until those implementing regulations or directives are published, companies will face uncertainty about compliance obligations and potential changes to their landed costs for products incorporating steel, aluminium or copper.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cf3c3950400ed7b4914be3Fri, 03 Apr 2026 22:17:07 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/03/us-criticises-china-over-surge-in-panama-flagged-vessel-detentions-amid-canal-dispute<p>The US Secretary of State condemns China's increased detention of Panama-flagged vessels, marking a new escalation in trade tensions linked to Panama Canal disputes and wider US-China rivalry.</p><p>Washington, DC , US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sharply criticised what he characterised as Chinese interference with commercial shipping after a rise in detentions of vessels flying Panama’s flag, saying the moves threaten global trade and partner sovereignty.</p> <p>"China's decision to detain or otherwise impede Panama-flagged vessels engaged in lawful trade destabilises supply chains, raises costs, and erodes confidence in the global trading system. The United States stands with Panama against any retaliatory actions against its sovereignty and will always support our partners in the face of bullying," Rubio wrote on X, according to a report by ANI.</p> <p>The accusations follow claims by the US Federal Maritime Commission that Chinese authorities dramatically increased inspections and hold‑backs of Panama‑flagged ships in recent weeks. "China has now imposed a surge in detentions of Panama‑flagged vessels in Chinese ports under the guise of port state control, far exceeding historical norms," FMC Chair Laura DiBella said in a statement, adding that the commission is authorised to investigate whether foreign practices create conditions unfavourable to US shipping, according to the FMC release.</p> <p>Reporting by the Associated Press put the scale of the spike into sharper relief, saying Chinese ports detained 92 of 124 Panama‑flagged vessels in March, roughly 75% of arrivals, a sharp jump from usual levels. The AP account, echoed by other outlets, said Washington views the Panama Canal as strategically vital and that the episode has intensified a wider US‑China rivalry in the region.</p> <p>The current dispute traces back to a Panamanian court decision in late January that found the long‑running concession granting Hong Kong‑based CK Hutchison's Panama Ports Company the right to operate the Balboa and Cristóbal terminals unconstitutional. Government action to assume control of the two terminals and temporarily hand operations to U.S. affiliates of Maersk APM Terminals and MSC drew a swift reaction. According to the FMC statement, that January ruling followed an audit alleging irregularities in the concession’s legal basis.</p> <p>Panama has downplayed the row, characterising the actions in Chinese ports as routine inspections, while China has denied acting in retaliation and accused the United States of seeking influence over the canal, as reported by the Washington Post and Investing.com. CK Hutchison’s Panama Ports Company has launched arbitration at the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris, pursuing roughly USD 2 billion in damages over the concession dispute, Reuters and other outlets have noted.</p> <p>Analysts warn the developments could carry meaningful consequences for trade flows. Industry estimates cited across coverage place the Panama Canal as handling about 5% of global maritime trade and a substantial share of container traffic bound for the United States; the FMC has warned that Panama‑flagged ships carry a significant portion of US containerised trade. The commission said it is monitoring whether foreign regulatory measures are being used as economic leverage.</p> <p>The episode arrives amid heightened diplomatic attention ahead of a planned summit in Beijing on May 14–15, where US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are expected to discuss trade and strategic issues, including the canal dispute, according to the ANI report. With tensions between the three capitals unresolved, shipping companies and registries are weighing the commercial and reputational risks of an extended standoff.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cf3c3950400ed7b4914be9Fri, 03 Apr 2026 22:14:28 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/03/hormuz-blockade-risks-triggering-a-global-surge-in-construction-material-costs<p>A prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz could escalate worldwide construction costs by disrupting energy, freight, and raw material supplies, warns Linesight amid escalating geopolitical tensions.</p><p>The prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz threatens to drive up prices for key construction materials worldwide by raising energy and freight costs and disrupting supply chains, according to a study by global construction consultant Linesight.</p> <p>Linesight warns that continued restrictions on the narrow waterway between Iran and the United Arab Emirates , through which around a fifth of the world’s oil passes , are already feeding through to higher production and transport costs for aluminium, steel, copper and cement. “Recent disruption is not about a single event, it is the accumulation of energy volatility, constrained logistics and geopolitical risk across multiple routes,” Linesight vice‑president Derek McNamara said in the report.</p> <p>Aluminium emerges as particularly exposed. Gulf states account for roughly nine per cent of global aluminium output but depend on imported bauxite and alumina for refining, and recent interruptions to gas supplies have forced at least one Qatari smelter to suspend operations on 3 March while Aluminium Bahrain has halted shipping, Linesight says. Industry observers report aluminium prices have climbed by nearly 10% since the blockade took effect, with more than five million tonnes historically moving through the strait each year, according to Vilpe.</p> <p>Steel and cement face similar pressure because their manufacture consumes large quantities of energy. Rising gas and diesel prices are increasing furnace and kiln costs, while heavier materials such as cement are vulnerable to rapidly rising freight charges as vessels are diverted along longer routes. Vilpe estimates rerouting ships via the Cape of Good Hope adds 10–15 days to deliveries and can raise freight costs by 30–50%. Linesight cautions that a brief disruption may be absorbed, but a sustained period of elevated energy and shipping costs would effectively reset cement price baselines across multiple regions.</p> <p>Copper prices are also threatened by ancillary supply shocks. Although the Gulf is not a major copper producer, it supplies large volumes of sulphur, a by‑product of oil and gas extraction that is necessary to make sulphuric acid used in copper ore processing. Linesight says the conflict imperils nearly half of global sulphur exports, creating a risk of acid shortages at smelters and further upward pressure on copper costs.</p> <p>Market indicators and industry sources corroborate the consultant’s analysis. Producer price data show building‑materials costs rising: the producer price index for materials and services used in non‑residential construction increased marginally month‑on‑month and was up over 3% year‑on‑year from February 2025, driven by metal price gains, according to analysis circulated by industry group AGC Florida. Energy markets have surged in parallel; reports place oil above $100 per barrel and, in some summaries, above $110, while European natural gas prices have jumped by more than 60% since the crisis began, contributing to higher manufacturing expenses across supply chains.</p> <p>The blockade has also prompted commercial suppliers to consider passing costs to buyers. Travis Perkins, a major UK building‑materials supplier, said in recent industry communications it has received notices from manufacturing partners that they are contemplating energy surcharges or price hikes. “In the last week or so, we've had communications from various manufacturing suppliers of ours saying they're looking at energy surcharges or they're looking at price increases to counteract energy rises,” Travis Perkins CEO Gavin Slark said.</p> <p>Beyond raw materials, the disruption is amplifying wider supply‑chain stress. Higher diesel and freight costs are increasing hauling and on‑site operating expenses for contractors, contributing to project delays and postponements as owners reassess budgets. Financial and investor commentary warns that consumer and industrial sectors reliant on Asian manufacturing will feel knock‑on effects, with apparel and other goods already facing margin pressure from tariffs and now from energy and shipping shocks.</p> <p>The wider humanitarian and geopolitical backdrop is severe. The conflict escalated with strikes that began on 28 February and have caused extensive damage across Iran and the region; humanitarian assessments cited in reporting attribute damage to tens of thousands of civilian buildings inside Iran. Iranian reprisals and threats to energy infrastructure have reduced traffic through the Hormuz corridor, and commentators note that even if the strait reopens, it may be some time before flows return to prior levels.</p> <p>Linesight’s findings underline the interconnected nature of the current crisis: from immediate spikes in oil and gas prices to constrained logistics and shortages of feedstocks such as sulphur, a continued blockade risks a sustained rise in construction‑material costs that would filter through to developers, contractors and end customers worldwide.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cf3c3850400ed7b4914bdfFri, 03 Apr 2026 22:13:59 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/supply-chain-leaders-accelerate-ai-adoption-to-navigate-volatility-and-sustainability-pressures-in-2026<p>A new report reveals how organisations are shifting AI from experimentation to frontline decision support amid persistent economic and geopolitical uncertainties, with a focus on operational resilience and sustainability.</p><p>RELEX Solutions’ State of Supply Chain 2026 report paints a picture of organisations moving artificial intelligence out of the lab and into frontline planning as persistent volatility forces tougher choices across sourcing, pricing and inventory.</p> <p>According to the report, which draws on a January 2026 survey of 514 retail, manufacturing, wholesale and supply‑chain leaders, confidence in AI for supply‑chain decision‑making is rising: 67 percent of retail and manufacturing respondents say their confidence has increased compared with last year. That greater faith is tempered by caution about autonomy, 54 percent would have AI make recommendations with humans making the final call, while only 10 percent would trust AI to act entirely independently.</p> <p>The research shows AI adoption is already focused on core operational problems. Nearly half of respondents (47 percent) are using or plan to use AI for inventory and supply optimisation, and 41 percent are applying it to logistics and routing. Looking ahead, 71 percent expect to invest in generative and agentic AI and 60 percent in predictive AI over the next three to five years, signalling a shift from point solutions to broader, decision‑support platforms.</p> <p>“AI is becoming part of everyday supply chain decision‑making,” said Dr. Madhav Durbha, group VP of manufacturing industry strategy at RELEX Solutions. “As volatility persists, companies are investing in AI‑driven forecasting, optimization and decision support to respond faster and operate with greater confidence, even when conditions change quickly.”</p> <p>The report situates AI adoption against a backdrop of acute economic and geopolitical pressures. According to RELEX, 86 percent of supply‑chain leaders have been affected by trade policy changes or tariffs, prompting a mixture of responses: more than half of companies have raised consumer prices to cover higher costs, 24 percent have shifted sourcing away from countries most directly affected by trade moves, and 18 percent have restructured supply chains or delayed investments. RELEX also finds 60 percent of companies are overhauling their supply chains in response to growing trade complexity and market unpredictability.</p> <p>Sector differences are notable. Retailers highlight sudden swings in consumer demand as a primary concern, with 30 percent identifying rapid demand shifts as a major challenge and using AI‑driven forecasting and inventory tools to improve responsiveness. Manufacturers name raw material procurement disruption as their most impacted area, 57 percent, and point to regulatory and compliance pressures, cited by 34 percent, as an additional strain. The report suggests firms are increasingly using AI to link demand signals with procurement and production decisions to sharpen forecasts and reduce supplier risk.</p> <p>Sustainability has moved from rhetoric to restriction: 63 percent of respondents say the importance of sustainability in their supply‑chain strategy has increased, making ESG considerations an operational constraint that must be balanced against cost and service objectives.</p> <p>Investment appetite is real but implementation faces headwinds. RELEX notes that 60 percent of organisations are directing funds to AI as a way to navigate inflation and trade volatility, yet nearly half report talent shortages and budgetary limits that could impede deployment. The result is a split between organisations that accelerate tech adoption and those forced to postpone or reshape programmes.</p> <p>The combined findings portray supply‑chain leaders confronting three linked dilemmas: how to deploy AI effectively without ceding critical judgement; how to recalibrate sourcing, pricing and inventory policy under tariff and demand uncertainty; and how to meet rising sustainability expectations while managing cost pressure. RELEX positions its AI‑native platform as a tool for these challenges; the company lists customers including Circle K, Dollar Tree and Family Dollar, M&amp;S Food, PetSmart and The Home Depot.</p> <p>Industry commentary in the report underscores a pragmatic stance: AI is valued increasingly for decision support rather than full automation, and executives are prioritising investments that promise faster, more confident responses to change while recognising that talent, budgets and governance will shape what those investments deliver.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cb47ddae9471fe4c4594e8Wed, 01 Apr 2026 08:42:21 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/rising-energy-prices-amid-middle-east-conflict-threaten-londons-fresh-food-supply-chain<p>Renewed fighting in the Middle East is impacting London's fresh-food network through rising fuel costs and disrupted shipping, with broader implications for global and humanitarian food security.</p><p>The fallout from renewed fighting in the Middle East is spreading well beyond energy markets and is now exerting palpable pressure on London’s fresh-food network, according to traders and industry groups at New Covent Garden Market in Nine Elms.</p> <p>Those who supply the capital’s top hotels and restaurants say higher oil prices, disrupted shipping and strained logistics are compounding an already difficult season. Brent crude has risen above $115 a barrel, increasing the cost of road, sea and air freight for goods that the market imports heavily at this time of year. Traders describe the effects as immediate: fewer available flights for perishable cargoes, higher freight bills and the need to source produce from more distant, and often more expensive, origins.</p> <p>“The people in the market are obviously going to be feeling like everyone else, very concerned,” said Gary Marshall, chairman of the Covent Garden Tenants Association, pointing to the cumulative effect of rising business rates, tariffs and supply-chain disruption. For suppliers serving high-end kitchens, the balancing act has become daily. “We’re bringing in produce like tender stem broccoli from Kenya and Spain,” said Marcus Rowlerson, managing director of Le Marché. “But flying goods in or even securing flights has become more difficult, and the supply chain is now intermittent.”</p> <p>Those sourcing difficulties coincide with a seasonal lull before UK harvests ramp up, leaving businesses dependent on imports for staples such as herbs and citrus. Suppliers warn their customers have limited headroom to absorb further price rises, and that mounting duties and operational costs risk eroding margins across the hospitality sector.</p> <p>The strains seen at Covent Garden are part of a broader pattern warned about by humanitarian agencies and market analysts. According to the World Food Programme, disruptions to fuel supplies and trade routes threaten not only commercial markets but also humanitarian operations; the agency warns that up to 45 million additional people could be pushed into acute hunger if food and fuel costs keep rising. The WFP says it is re-routing supply chains and scaling up assistance to try to keep aid moving amid mounting bottlenecks.</p> <p>Industry and research bodies echo those concerns for global food security. S&amp;P Global Energy and analysts at the International Food Policy Research Institute highlight the conflict’s knock-on impacts on fertiliser availability, shipping routes and freight rates, each element capable of pushing farm-to-fork costs higher. Rabobank’s analysis similarly points to the strategic role of the region in refined fuels, petrochemical feedstocks and logistics, warning that disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz can quickly cascade through fuel, power and input costs across agriculture chains.</p> <p>Domestic business sentiment reflects this uncertainty. A survey by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales found two-thirds of UK firms name rising energy costs as their primary worry, with more than half citing supply-chain disruption. For food-sector companies that already face climate-driven shocks, such as floods in parts of Europe and atypically warm winters in the UK, those pressures are arriving on top of volatile input costs and tighter labour conditions.</p> <p>The humanitarian toll is already visible in the region. Save the Children reports sharp hikes in food prices in some of the most vulnerable countries, stretching household budgets and threatening to deepen food insecurity as communities approach religious festivals. The charity says rising fuel and food bills are compounding the suffering of families long weakened by conflict and economic shock.</p> <p>Market participants in London express frustration at how price moves are communicated to consumers. Marshall criticised what he says is a tendency among larger retailers to rapidly pass on cost increases and, at times, amplify perceived shortages, a dynamic he warns can undermine trust with customers in the premium segment where reliability and relationships matter.</p> <p>For now, traders at New Covent Garden are focused on short-term mitigation: diversifying sourcing, negotiating freight and adjusting orders to protect supply and quality. But analysts and aid agencies caution that, unless energy prices ease and shipping stabilises, pressures will persist and could intensify, with implications for availability, prices and the resilience of both commercial and humanitarian food systems.</p> <p>The market in Nine Elms offers an early indication of how geopolitical shocks in distant seas can ripple into everyday life in London, from the origin of a vegetable on a plate to the cost of a meal in the capital. As industry bodies, relief organisations and suppliers adapt, the coming months will test the ability of global and local supply chains to absorb sustained stress without severe disruption to consumers and vulnerable populations alike.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cb47ddae9471fe4c4594e2Wed, 01 Apr 2026 08:42:07 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/maritime-conflict-disrupts-tea-exports-across-africa-and-asia-threatening-livelihoods-and-economies<p>The widening Iran conflict has caused severe disruptions to tea exports from Kenya, Sri Lanka, India, and Vietnam, with port congestions, insurance issues, and logistical breakdowns jeopardising livelihoods and international markets.</p><p>As the conflict centred on Iran has widened maritime risk and upended insurance and shipping networks, major tea-producing nations are reporting acute supply-chain breakdowns that threaten export revenue and rural livelihoods.</p> <p>Kenya’s tea trade has been among the hardest hit. Warehouse manager Erick Onyango told Al Jazeera, "The warehouse is full right now because the teas are not moving," a picture echoed by industry groups and ministers. The East African Tea Trade Association and reporting by regional outlets estimate between 6,000 and 8,000 tonnes of Kenyan tea, valued at roughly $23–24 million, remain stranded at the port of Mombasa. The backlog has forced some firms to place staff on temporary leave and left auction floors unusually quiet. According to the Tea Board of Kenya, Iran imported about $32.8 million of Kenyan tea in 2024, and Pakistan alone accounted for a large share of Kenyan exports last year. Government figures and media reports put the immediate economic toll at hundreds of millions of shillings weekly, with one official estimate of Ksh300 million lost per week and industry calculations of cumulative foregone business running into the billions of shillings. Closure of key transshipment hubs such as Salalah and broader route suspensions have amplified the disruption, depriving exporters of access to traditional markets and leaving cargoes unsaleable or unshippable.</p> <p>Sri Lanka is likewise confronting severe export interruption. According to the Financial Times, the escalation of hostilities since 28 February 2026 has impaired shipping corridors, reduced marine insurance availability and rendered calls to many ports commercially unviable. Ten principal markets that took roughly 43 million kilograms of Ceylon tea in 2025, and as many as a further dozen destinations, have seen deliveries interrupted as carriers withdraw services and vessels are denied entry. Industry sources and local reporting place the cost to Sri Lankan exporters at about $10–15 million per week, and ministers have urged traders to limit additional consignments to harbours to avoid exacerbating port congestion.</p> <p>In India, producers in the Darjeeling hills have warned that fuel constraints are threatening the vital first-flush harvest. The Darjeeling Tea Association has sought emergency relief from the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas for access to liquefied petroleum gas, a key input for processing, emphasising that the industry supports tens of thousands of local workers. Business reporting notes that first- and second-flush teas account for a minority of volume but a disproportionate share of region revenue, and that India’s record export volumes in 2025, reported at 281 million kilograms valued near $1 billion, were heavily dependent on Middle Eastern markets, which now face elevated risk.</p> <p>Vietnam’s tea sector is also feeling the fallout. Producers are reporting fuel shortages, logistical breakdowns and returned consignments, with some shipments bound for Afghanistan sent back mid-route. Local officials in Lao Cai Province say around 1,400 tonnes of tea remain unsent at the commune level, and provincial authorities are seeking loan-interest subsidies to keep harvesting operations viable for roughly 3,000 seasonal workers. Company representatives warn that a large share of Vietnamese tea, almost half the 2025 exports, moves to Pakistan and from there often onwards to Afghanistan, making the market exposure acute. Than Ngu of Vostea observed that Vietnam has become heavily dependent on Afghanistan over decades and argued that many Vietnamese teas have been adapted to Afghan tastes with additives and processing methods that hinder simple redirection to alternative buyers. "Vietnam depends too much on the Afghanistan market," he said. "About 50% of Vietnamese tea goes to Afghanistan." He added that roughly half of those teas would be difficult to place elsewhere without changes in quality and cleanliness.</p> <p>Across the affected countries, exporters face a twin squeeze: physical confinement of stock at ports and the commercial unviability of voyages due to insurance withdrawal and heightened war risk surcharges. Industry associations warn that prolonged interruptions will not only reduce near-term foreign exchange receipts but also raise long-term costs for smallholders and plantation workers through deferred payments, loan servicing pressures and possible reductions in planting and maintenance.</p> <p>Some governments are already responding with relief measures and appeals to trading partners. Kenyan and Sri Lankan ministers have publicly quantified losses and called for policies to slow arrivals of new shipments to already congested harbours. Vietnamese local authorities are seeking targeted financial support to sustain field operations. Indian industry bodies have petitioned for prioritised fuel allocations during critical production windows.</p> <p>Analysts say the crisis highlights the fragility of commodity chains that rely on narrow maritime corridors and concentrated destination markets. Diversifying buyers, adapting processing to meet different quality standards and expanding regional logistics capacity are among the policy and commercial responses being discussed by trade groups. For now, however, exporters and labour forces across East Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia face weeks if not months of elevated uncertainty as shipping routes, insurance markets and geopolitical tensions evolve.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cc9953a9c25e187033dbe0Wed, 01 Apr 2026 08:41:52 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/iranian-missile-strikes-on-haifa-refinery-signal-escalating-regional-energy-risks<p>A missile attack by Iran on Israel’s key oil-processing complex in Haifa highlights rising regional tensions and the potential for widespread disruptions in global energy markets amid ongoing strikes across the Middle East.</p><p>An Iranian missile strike on Israel’s largest oil-processing complex in Haifa on March 19, 2026, caused smoke, local power outages and minor injuries but, officials say, no major infrastructure damage, underscoring how the long-running exchange of strikes over energy targets is escalating regional economic risk.</p> <p>According to the Israeli Energy Ministry, the Bazan Group facilities in Haifa Bay , which process nearly 9.8 million tonnes of crude a year and supply as much as 60% of Israel’s transport fuels , were struck during a wave of Iranian attacks. Energy Minister Eli Cohen said the assault produced “no significant damage to infrastructure sites”, Al Jazeera reported.</p> <p>The Israel Defense Forces disputed that any direct missile hits struck the refinery itself, saying instead that "the impacts at the oil refineries in Haifa were caused by falling fragments following the interception of an Iranian ballistic missile". Video and social-media posts showed a plume rising from the industrial zone and a Hebrew-language post by journalist Itay Blumental reading: טיל ששוגר מאיראן פגע בבתי הזיקוק בחיפה. לא ידוע על נפגעים.</p> <p>Local authorities said shrapnel from the intercepted missile severed a high-voltage transmission line, triggering outages across parts of Haifa and nearby neighbourhoods before the Israel Electric Corporation restored most supplies; the industrial area remained partially without power, The Jerusalem Post reported. Hospitals and emergency services treated at least one person for minor injuries from falling debris.</p> <p>Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps described the strike as part of an ongoing campaign of retaliation for strikes on its energy and military infrastructure, with state-linked outlets describing the operation as the 65th wave of assaults targeting Israeli refineries. Analysts note Tehran’s efforts are deliberately focused on symbolic and economically sensitive targets rather than mass civilian casualties, a pattern highlighted in commentary published by The Atlantic analysing Iran’s low-cost, asymmetric tactics.</p> <p>The attacks have broader market implications. Industry observers point to recent hits on Gulf energy facilities , including damage at Qatar’s Ras Laffan LNG hub that analysts say contributed to sharp rises in European gas prices , as evidence that disruptions to energy nodes can ripple quickly through global markets. Al-Monitor and other regional outlets warn that repeated strikes on production and transit points, combined with the risk around the Strait of Hormuz, raise the prospect of prolonged supply-side volatility.</p> <p>Israeli officials emphasised that fuel supplies remain intact for now and that the Bazan Group continued assessments of the site. Still, the incident fits into a widening pattern of assaults on oil and gas infrastructure across the Middle East, involving Gulf states as well as Israel, which market analysts say will keep energy markets on edge while complicating diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the confrontation.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cc9953a9c25e187033dbd8Wed, 01 Apr 2026 08:41:34 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/omans-foreign-minister-criticises-us-policy-in-iran-conflict-and-urges-de-escalation<p>Oman’s foreign minister has delivered a rare critical assessment of Washington’s approach to Iran, calling for immediate de-escalation and highlighting the region’s fragile stability amid ongoing military tensions and diplomatic efforts.</p><p>Oman’s foreign minister has delivered an unusually blunt rebuke of Washington’s handling of the war with Iran, arguing that the conflict represents a profound strategic error and urging America’s partners to press for an immediate end to hostilities. According to The Independent, Badr Albusaidi wrote in The Economist that the United States has been drawn into a fight that “is not America’s war” and called the intervention President Donald Trump has backed “the American administration’s greatest miscalculation.”</p> <p>Albusaidi, long a discreet mediator between Tehran and Washington, warned that neither the United States nor Israel will likely secure their declared goals through military means. “This is not America’s war, and there is no likely scenario in which both Israel and America will get what they want from it,” he wrote, adding that Israel’s aim of overthrowing the Islamic Republic would demand a protracted ground campaign and a level of American troop commitment that the US government and public do not want.</p> <p>The Omani minister framed Iran’s retaliatory attacks , including strikes on oil and gas facilities that rattled global energy markets and several incidents that struck Omani shipping and infrastructure , as a foreseeable, if regrettable, consequence of the broader campaign. “Faced with what both Israel and America described as a war designed to terminate the Islamic Republic, this was probably the only rational option available to the Iranian leadership,” he said, in language reported by The Independent.</p> <p>Albusaidi’s intervention comes after months in which Oman hosted indirect talks between US and Iranian officials. Al Jazeera reported that those mediated negotiations in Muscat and later rounds led by Omani facilitation achieved breakthroughs, with Iran reportedly agreeing not to stockpile enriched uranium and negotiators describing discussions as “positive.” Oman’s role as an intermediary included meetings with senior US figures; Al Jazeera noted that Albusaidi met Vice-President J D Vance in Washington and has engaged with US envoys including Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.</p> <p>Yet the diplomatic progress that Omani officials described as bringing “off-ramps” and possible comprehensive resolution was overtaken by military strikes that have deepened regional divisions. The Guardian reported claims that an Israeli attack on Iran’s largest gasfield , South Pars , exacerbated tensions and fueled accusations among Gulf allies that Washington’s policy has been influenced by Israeli objectives. US president Donald Trump said he had not been informed of that strike in advance, a statement Israeli officials disputed, according to The Guardian.</p> <p>The fallout has tested transatlantic unity. European leaders have been reluctant to join any military effort to reopen the Strait of Hormuz after Tehran moved to block the vital shipping lane, with Germany’s chancellor ruling out participation and the UK’s prime minister saying Britain would not be “drawn into the wider war” while stressing the need to keep oil supplies stable. Industry data and commentary at the time showed oil markets reacting sharply to attacks on energy infrastructure across the Gulf.</p> <p>Oman’s appeals for a ceasefire and a return to diplomacy reflect both its role as a conduit for talks and a wider regional alarm at the conflict’s escalation. Al Jazeera quoted Albusaidi urging immediate cessation of hostilities and the use of available diplomatic “off-ramps.” The Omani foreign minister emphasised that the mediation track had produced tangible advances and warned that military escalation would undo those gains.</p> <p>The dispute over whether Washington was forewarned of Israeli operations highlights a deeper fissure: allies are increasingly accusing each other of allowing narrow strategic aims to determine actions with far-reaching consequences. According to reporting in The Guardian, some US and Gulf officials believe Israeli efforts aimed at regime change in Tehran have steered American policy into confrontational territory for which there is little domestic appetite in the United States.</p> <p>Albusaidi’s critique is notable for its directness. In urging American partners to press the administration to withdraw from the military course it has embraced, he sought to reframe the conflict as one from which the United States should disentangle itself and return to negotiations that, until recently, showed signs of producing a diplomatic settlement. With attacks continuing and energy markets on edge, Oman’s call for urgent de-escalation underscores both the fragility of the region and the diplomatic channels that some Gulf states say remain available to avert further catastrophe.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cc9953a9c25e187033dbceWed, 01 Apr 2026 08:40:54 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/us-president-suggests-iran-conflict-could-end-within-weeks-amid-mixed-signals-and-regional-tensions<p>President Donald Trump indicates a possible US troop withdrawal from Iran within two to three weeks, as diplomatic efforts and regional violence intensify amidst conflicting messages and rising energy prices.</p><p>President Donald Trump said on Tuesday the United States could halt its military operations against Iran within “two weeks, maybe two weeks, maybe three,” and asserted Tehran would not need to strike a deal with Washington as a condition for a de‑escalation. The comments came as U.S. officials and allies offered varying timelines and objectives for the campaign now in its fifth week.</p> <p>“We’ll be leaving very soon,” Trump told reporters at the White House, adding that “Iran doesn’t have to make a deal, no,” and “No, they don’t have to make a deal with me.” The White House later scheduled a national address for 6 p.m. PST to provide “an important update on Iran,” Reuters reported.</p> <p>The president’s latest timeframe differs from earlier public statements from his administration and allies. In early March he described the campaign as likely to last four to five weeks but allowed it could persist “far longer than that,” according to The Guardian. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters later that month he expected the operation to wrap up in “weeks, not months,” while President Trump in late March declared the war “won” and said regime change had been achieved as talks moved forward, according to reporting in The Washington Post.</p> <p>Diplomatic channels have been active even amid fighting. The U.S. has presented a 15‑point ceasefire framework that would, among other demands, require Iran to cease uranium enrichment and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, Reuters said. U.S. officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have signalled willingness to negotiate a settlement; Hegseth told reporters on Tuesday that talks were “ongoing and gaining strength” but that military pressure would continue if Iran did not comply.</p> <p>Iran’s response has been mixed. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi told Qatar’s Al Jazeera that he was receiving direct messages from U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff but described them as exchanges rather than formal negotiations. Meanwhile Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps announced it would begin targeting 18 U.S. and Western companies operating in the region, listing firms such as Microsoft, Google, Apple, Intel, IBM, Tesla and Boeing, Reuters reported. When asked about those threats, Trump responded that he was not worried, saying “They don’t have much left to threaten.”</p> <p>The conflict’s regional spillover has intensified. Reuters reported renewed strikes in and around Beirut after Israel said it targeted senior figures in the Iran‑aligned group Hezbollah; Lebanon’s health ministry said at least seven people were killed and 24 wounded in two strikes. Pakistan, China and other states have pushed for an immediate ceasefire and offered mediation, while Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey have been reported by The Washington Post as participating in brokering talks.</p> <p>The fighting has also affected global energy markets and domestic politics. GasBuddy data cited by Reuters showed the U.S. national average retail gasoline price topped $4 a gallon for the first time in over three years, and analysts and officials have warned that disruptions to Persian Gulf shipping and Iranian attacks on regional infrastructure could keep prices elevated. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found roughly two‑thirds of Americans favour a swift end to U.S. involvement even if that means not achieving all of the administration’s stated objectives.</p> <p>Observers note competing narratives from Washington about the campaign’s progress and exit strategy. Some commentators and analysts, cited in opinion pieces and reporting, argue the U.S. has substantially degraded Iran’s military capacity; others point to Tehran’s remaining ability to threaten oil flows and sustain proxy operations across the region as complicating any rapid conclusion.</p> <p>As fighting continues to claim lives and unsettle markets, U.S. officials say they retain military options while pursuing diplomatic avenues. The next 48 to 72 hours were described by senior Pentagon officials as decisive, a timetable that sits alongside the president’s public prediction of a withdrawal within weeks.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cc9953a9c25e187033dbcaWed, 01 Apr 2026 08:40:07 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/indonesia-loosens-coal-restrictions-amid-global-energy-market-turmoil<p>In response to disruptions caused by conflicts in the Middle East, Indonesia is raising coal production limits and reviewing export taxes to stabilise global energy supplies and boost state revenue.</p><p>Indonesia's government has moved to loosen restrictions on coal output as global energy markets reel from the fallout of the war in Iran, saying it will raise miners' production limits and reassess export taxation to capture higher state revenue.</p> <p>Coordinating Economic Minister Airlangga Hartarto announced the measures as authorities seek to respond to a sharp uptick in energy prices triggered by supply disruptions stemming from the conflict in the Middle East. According to Bloomberg, the change will allow producers to increase coal volumes beyond recent ceilings, while officials are examining adjustments to export taxes on the fuel.</p> <p>The decision comes amid a wider scramble to stabilise energy availability after attacks on oil and gas infrastructure and threats to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz have curtailed flows of crude and liquefied natural gas. Analysts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies say damage to facilities across the Gulf and the effective paralysis of maritime traffic have forced producers to suspend exports and close some fields, helping push Brent crude sharply higher in early March. The World Economic Forum estimates roughly one fifth of global crude and natural gas production has been affected by the disruptions, contributing to a more than 25 percent rise in oil prices and renewed inflationary pressure for consumers and businesses.</p> <p>Financial institutions warn of broader macroeconomic knock-on effects. Morgan Stanley has signalled that persistent supply shocks from the Strait of Hormuz could lift gas and petrol costs, add to consumer price inflation, dampen household spending and complicate central-bank policy decisions, potentially increasing the likelihood of smaller interest-rate moves or a pause in tightening. Prolonged escalation also risks higher defence spending and wider fiscal deficits, which could push up long-term bond yields and weigh on equities.</p> <p>Indonesia’s move to expand coal output is notable against recent domestic policy shifts. Reporting by S&amp;P Global indicated that Jakarta had informed many miners of reduced production quotas for 2026, with cuts of between about 9 percent and 80 percent communicated to individual companies. That earlier guidance, aimed at curbing planned volumes, had implications for miners’ contractual commitments and state non-tax revenue; the new direction appears to reverse parts of that approach in response to the external shock.</p> <p>Industry observers say raising coal availability may temper some immediate supply-side stress for markets that rely on thermal coal as an alternative to gas and oil, but the effect on global prices will depend on the scale and timing of additional Indonesian shipments and whether buyers face logistical constraints. The government’s review of export taxes could further shape incentives for producers and the pace at which incremental volumes reach international buyers; officials have framed the tax review as a way to bolster state coffers amid the price surge.</p> <p>Taken together, the Indonesian measures reflect a policy balancing act: managers must weigh domestic fiscal interests, miners’ contractual obligations and international market stability while responding to a geopolitical shock that has amplified energy-market volatility worldwide.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cc9952a9c25e187033dbc0Wed, 01 Apr 2026 08:39:56 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/04/01/us-signals-potential-rapid-troop-withdrawal-amid-escalating-iran-israel-conflict<p>As violence intensifies between Iran, Israel, and the US in the Middle East, Washington considers withdrawing forces within weeks, while regional and international actors seek diplomatic solutions amid mounting economic and human tolls.</p><p>As fighting between the United States, Iran and Israel entered a new, volatile phase this week, Washington signalled it may wind down direct military involvement in the region even as leaders warned of further strikes and rival powers proposed diplomatic remedies.</p> <p>Speaking at the White House, President Donald Trump said the United States could pull its forces out of the Middle East within “two-three weeks” and that American troops would be “leaving very soon,” while reiterating that Tehran need not reach a formal deal for attacks to cease. According to White House briefings reported by Axios, the president also warned that, before any withdrawal, the United States might strike Iran’s energy and export infrastructure if the Strait of Hormuz remained closed, and urged fuel-dependent allies to secure their own supplies.</p> <p>U.S. officials portrayed their posture in mixed terms. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told broadcasters that Washington remains in contact with Tehran through intermediaries and suggested a resolution may be approaching, remarks earlier summarised by Axios and by reporting from the G7. At the same time, U.S. Central Command publicly rejected claims that American forces struck civilian sites in Lamerd on February 28, saying its review found no evidence of strikes within 30 miles of the city, according to press statements reported by the Indian Express.</p> <p>On the ground, the confrontation has shown classic asymmetric dynamics. Analysts and reporting in The Atlantic note that despite heavy U.S. and Israeli firepower, airstrikes, missile strikes and a large naval presence, Iran has employed lower-cost tools such as drones, sea mines and selective missile strikes that continue to disrupt shipping and energy infrastructure and complicate countermeasures. That strategy has helped Tehran exert leverage over the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint that carries about one fifth of global oil exports and which remains a central flashpoint in the campaign.</p> <p>The human and economic toll is mounting. Government and media tallies cited across outlets put the regional death toll in the thousands, with heavy losses reported in Iran and Lebanon and dozens of allied and coalition casualties, while energy markets have reacted sharply: AAA and news reporting show U.S. pump prices have risen above $4 per gallon and crude briefly topped and fluctuated around triple-digit levels as traders priced in the disruption.</p> <p>Tehran has escalated its rhetoric and issued new operational threats. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps said it would target US-linked companies operating in the region from April 1, naming major technology and aerospace firms, Reuters and the Indian Express reported; state media framed the move as retaliation for strikes on Iranian sites. Iranian officials, including Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, have simultaneously signalled readiness to continue fighting, according to AP reporting.</p> <p>Amid that violence, China and Pakistan unveiled a five-point initiative calling for an immediate ceasefire, protection of civilian infrastructure and shipping-lane security, and for diplomacy under the UN Charter to resolve the crisis, a joint statement reported by the Indian Express and Axios said. The plan underscores growing international concern about the conflict’s spillover effects on global trade and regional stability.</p> <p>Policy options facing Washington remain fraught. A recent analysis in The Atlantic outlined four possible exit strategies being weighed in U.S. policy circles, ranging from a negotiated settlement to an escalatory seizure of Iranian energy facilities, and warned each carries major risks, including prolonged asymmetric retaliation and an uncertain prospect of removing Iran’s nuclear or military capabilities. Those strategic uncertainties are reflected in public comments from senior U.S. officials who have suggested the war could conclude in weeks but have stopped short of promising a durable settlement.</p> <p>Israel has signalled confidence in battlefield gains; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the campaign has passed its midpoint and pointed to damage inflicted on Iranian military and industrial targets, while not offering a timetable for an end to hostilities, reporting by the Indian Express noted. Iran, meanwhile, has continued to launch long-range and proxy attacks across the Gulf and on regional targets, with incidents in Kuwait, the UAE and strikes attributed to Houthi forces against Israel contributing to a widening security environment described in AP coverage.</p> <p>As diplomatic channels and alternate peace proposals emerge, the immediate prospect is one of continued volatility. Washington’s stated willingness to draw down forces within weeks, the IRGC’s threats against corporate regional operations, and rival proposals from Beijing and Islamabad all point to a conflict still in flux, one in which military moves, economic pressure and international diplomacy remain tightly intertwined.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69cc9953a9c25e187033dbc6Wed, 01 Apr 2026 08:39:50 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/26/supreme-court-strikes-down-ieepa-tariffs-prompting-widespread-refunds-and-legal-disputes<p>A landmark ruling has invalidated U.S. tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, leading to refund processes, contractual disputes, and ongoing trade policy recalibrations.</p><p>On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a pivotal ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, holding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorise the President to impose tariffs. The 6–3 decision clarified that while IEEPA permits the President to “regulate… importation” during a declared national emergency, it does not extend to imposing tariffs, considered a form of taxation constitutionally reserved exclusively for Congress. The majority opinion emphasised the longstanding legislative purpose of IEEPA, which had traditionally been utilised for sanctions and asset blocking, not for broad-based trade duties. As such, the Court invalidated sweeping tariffs implemented under IEEPA, including so-called “fentanyl tariffs” on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, “reciprocal tariffs” applied at differing rates on all countries, plus additional tariffs on products originating from Brazil and India.</p> <p>In the immediate aftermath, the administration terminated these IEEPA-based tariffs effective February 24, 2026. However, the ruling does not impact other tariffs imposed under separate statutory authority, most notably those enacted under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, such as tariffs on steel, aluminium, autos, and various wood products, which remain in force.</p> <p>Following the Supreme Court’s decision, on March 4, Judge Timothy M. Eaton of the U.S. Court of International Trade directed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to initiate a process to refund importers all IEEPA tariffs paid, plus applicable interest. CBP is currently developing a refund mechanism through its Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) platform, anticipated to activate in the coming weeks. This development has generated considerable uncertainty among importers and downstream customers regarding their respective rights and obligations to these refunds.</p> <p>Under U.S. customs law, there is no automatic requirement for importers to pass on tariff refunds to suppliers, retailers, or consumers. Consequently, whether importers must distribute these refunds downstream depends largely on the contractual arrangements, such as purchase orders, invoices, and supply agreements, between parties. Legal experts advise all participants in the supply chain affected by the Supreme Court’s ruling to thoroughly review their contracts and related documents concerning the treatment of IEEPA duties to minimise potential disputes or litigation risks.</p> <p>Indeed, multiple lawsuits have quickly emerged alleging breach of contract, deceptive trade practices, and unjust enrichment tied to IEEPA tariff refunds. Even absent formal litigation, pressure is expected from retailers, consumers, logistics firms, and political figures urging importers to share these benefits with downstream parties, potentially prompting negotiations prior to the completion of refund distributions.</p> <p>The Supreme Court’s decision also raises significant accounting implications for companies subject to these tariffs. Financial reporting standards require affected entities to evaluate the impact of the ruling on their financial statements, including necessary disclosures about potential refunds and related contingent liabilities. Firms must consider the subsequent-events guidance to appropriately reflect the likelihood and magnitude of tariff repayments in their reports.</p> <p>While the ruling invalidates IEEPA-based tariffs and mandates their refund, it simultaneously highlights ongoing complexity in U.S. trade policy. Tariff risk has not disappeared but may shift to other legal mechanisms and statutes as the government continues to balance trade enforcement with congressional authority constraints.</p> <p>In sum, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed constitutional limits on executive power over taxation and trade tariffs, emphasizing that any broad imposition of import duties requires explicit congressional legislation. As the refund process unfolds, the commercial and legal ramifications for companies engaged in cross-border trade will continue to evolve, necessitating careful contract management, regulatory compliance, and strategic engagement with all stakeholders in the import-export ecosystem.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69c4be9cbdab41b03c67e6faThu, 26 Mar 2026 22:02:17 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/26/china-and-russias-covert-role-in-enabling-irans-military-resurgence-through-supply-chains<p>Despite Western sanctions, China and Russia are playing a crucial role in sustaining Iran’s drone and missile programmes by facilitating complex supply networks, posing a significant challenge to US-led efforts to curb Tehran’s military advancements.</p><p>As the ongoing conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran intensifies, attention has increasingly focussed on how China and Russia, despite their apparent reluctance to engage militarily, are key enablers of Iran’s sustained military operations through complex economic and technological networks. Contrary to early assumptions that Beijing and Moscow might remain passive or neutral, deeper analysis reveals their integral role in circumventing Western sanctions and bolstering Tehran’s drone and missile programmes by maintaining intricate supply chains and facilitating the flow of dual-use technologies.</p> <p>These networks, often referred to as the “Axis of Evasion,” comprise China, Russia, and Iran collaborating to bypass the extensive sanctions imposed by the United States and its allies. The Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center highlights that these countries exploit integrated supply chains that allow circumventing Western export controls, particularly because transactions occur outside the Western financial system. This system has grown resilient against sanction enforcement and enables persistent Iranian military development despite almost two decades of comprehensive economic restrictions.</p> <p>China is central to this dynamic. It imports Iranian oil despite sanctions and supplies Iran with sophisticated dual-use technologies, including drone components, navigation systems, and chemical precursors vital for rockets and explosives. Research and reports underscore how Iranian drones such as the Shahed series heavily rely on components sourced from Western, Japanese, and American manufacturers but rerouted through Chinese intermediaries. Chinese markets and distributors act as hubs that not only provide parts originally designed for civilian use but also facilitate their integration into weapons systems. China’s strategic partnership with Iran, formalised in early 2024, has further spiked these exports.</p> <p>Russia complements this arrangement by sharing drone technology and production expertise with Tehran. Since 2022, the two nations have intertwined their defence industrial capacities, with Russia establishing production facilities for Iranian drones and modifying them to fit its own military needs in Ukraine. By 2025, about 90 percent of Shahed drone assembly reportedly shifted to Russia. Ukrainian officials, including President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, have noted that Russia is now supplying Iran with Russian-made drones for use against US and Israeli targets, illustrating the self-reinforcing and evolving nature of the partnership. Chinese specialists have also reportedly assisted Russia in drone development, including the advanced Garpiya-3 drone, demonstrating a triangulated cooperation that spans continents and sanctions regimes.</p> <p>The supply chain extends beyond drones. Navigation technology, an essential enabler of drone accuracy, is being transferred from China and Russia to Iran. Chinese access to the BeiDou satellite system has allowed Iran to disrupt enemy reconnaissance efforts by producing decoy signals that confuse Western and Israeli intelligence. The US Treasury has repeatedly imposed sanctions on Chinese firms and fronts involved in supplying gyro navigation devices and sensors to Iran, but enforcement challenges persist due to the use of shell companies and transshipment hubs.</p> <p>Similarly, Iran’s missile and explosives programmes rely on chemical precursors sourced from China. The sprawling nature of China’s chemical industry and the diffuse global trade networks make it difficult to track and control shipments, resulting in Iranian access to vital materials for solid rocket fuels through intermediated trade. Recent reports indicate that Iranian shadow vessels transporting rocket fuel precursors often originate from Chinese ports, underscoring the ongoing material support gradient that sustains Tehran’s military-industrial complex.</p> <p>The United States has responded with a series of sanctions aimed at disrupting these supply networks. The Treasury Department has targeted various Chinese and Iranian front companies and individuals involved in the procurement and shipment of drone components. For instance, in December 2023, sanctions were placed on a network accused of illegally exporting US-made microelectronics to Iran, components found in drones active both in Ukraine and the Middle East. Earlier, in September 2022, Washington sanctioned Tehran-based Safiran Airport Services for facilitating drone shipments to Russia. Despite these efforts, consistent enforcement remains a daunting challenge, given the shadowy networks exploiting third-party countries for transshipment and disguise.</p> <p>Experts emphasise that focusing on China alone is insufficient to fully impede Iran’s military build-up. Iranian procurement depends on a web of distributors, logistics firms, and transshipment hubs across multiple jurisdictions, many of which lack the political will or regulatory capacity to enforce export controls robustly. These third countries, often economically pressured and hit by US tariffs, may unwittingly or reluctantly enable Iran’s evasion strategies. Consequently, analysts urge the US to implement a multifaceted approach that combines targeted sanctions with international cooperation, intelligence sharing, and incentives encouraging capacity building in customs enforcement and export control compliance.</p> <p>China’s role goes beyond simple trade facilitation. It has entrenched itself economically with Iran through mechanisms like a covert oil-for-infrastructure payment network and barter schemes involving sanctioned sectors such as automobiles and metals. This deep economic integration creates parallel financial and trade systems that undercut the effectiveness of US sanctions, allowing Iran not only to sustain but enlarge its export flows and reimport vital goods.</p> <p>Moreover, the collaboration reflects a strategic calculation rather than mere economic opportunism. Russia benefits from the global oil supply shocks caused by the conflict, while China leverages its dominance in rare-earth minerals and technology pathways to maintain leverage in this geopolitical tussle. Though China’s President Xi Jinping and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin appear cautious about direct military entanglements in the region, their governments tacitly support and enable Iran’s military-industrial resilience through this Axis of Evasion.</p> <p>With the Trump administration refocusing its attention on the Middle East and a delayed summit with Xi Jinping, there are calls for a robust diplomatic and enforcement strategy that directly confronts China on its role in facilitating Iran’s military capabilities. This would involve tightening scrutiny on Chinese exporters, intermediaries, and distributors of dual-use goods, alongside expanded entity listings and demand for enhanced export transparency.</p> <p>In sum, the ongoing US-led sanctions campaign faces significant obstacles posed by the sophisticated, multinational networks between China, Russia, and Iran that allow Tehran to continue producing and exporting drones and missile technologies. Overcoming this challenge requires an integrated and persistent effort to dismantle supply-chain evasions, bolster allied enforcement capacities, and address the geopolitical undercurrents driving this Axis of Evasion. Without such comprehensive measures, Iran’s ability to regenerate its advanced weapons programmes, and by extension, perpetuate regional instability, will endure despite Western efforts to contain it.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69c4be9cbdab41b03c67e6f8Thu, 26 Mar 2026 22:01:56 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/24/slovenia-imposes-fuel-purchase-limits-and-mobilises-army-amid-supply-crisis<p>Slovenia has introduced nationwide petrol and diesel purchase caps and mobilised the military to manage fuel distribution amid a surge in demand driven by cross-border procurement, highlighting vulnerabilities in regional energy logistics during geopolitical turmoil.</p><p>Slovenia has imposed nationwide limits on petrol and diesel purchases and mobilised the armed forces to help distribute fuel, as authorities seek to contain sudden, cross-border-driven demand that has strained retail supplies and exposed weaknesses in regional fuel logistics.</p> <p>Under rules announced this month, private motorists may buy no more than 50 litres per day while businesses, including hauliers and agricultural users, are capped at 200 litres. The measures will remain in place until further notice, the government says. Military personnel have been pressed into service to support transport and delivery operations, a sign of how the disruption has shifted from commercial to state-managed logistics.</p> <p>According to reporting by ANSA and BalkanEnergy, the government has begun a phased release from strategic reserves to relieve pressure on petrol stations; Environment, Climate and Energy Minister Bojan Kumer told reporters the releases are intended to support distribution networks rather than signal an outright supply collapse. ANSA also reported that Vienna-based motorists searching for cheaper fuel have been a major driver of the spike in demand, prompting the decision to lower excise duties earlier this month in an effort to blunt global price shocks.</p> <p>Industry sources and Spanish broadcaster Cadena SER say the supply stress has been acute: roughly half of service stations reported diesel shortages at one point and some border sites ran dry as “fuel tourism” concentrated purchases at a handful of forecourts. Retailers, they add, have struggled to replenish tanks fast enough because distribution flows were overwhelmed by unusually high volumes and panic buying.</p> <p>The government announced it would release up to 30 million litres from national strategic stocks while prohibiting exports of those emergency supplies to keep fuel inside the country. Official figures show Slovenia’s reserves total around 700 million litres, a buffer that covers only a limited number of months at normal consumption rates, underscoring how rapidly such stocks can be drawn down in a crisis.</p> <p>International market turmoil has compounded the domestic picture. Reporting compiled by Planet News notes oil benchmarks have surged, with Brent crude trading above $119 a barrel and West Texas Intermediate moving past $108, while the International Energy Agency authorised an unprecedented coordinated release of emergency crude from member countries to stabilise markets. Euronews has highlighted wider European exposure, citing elevated wholesale gas prices and EU-level emergency measures to reduce consumption and cap prices in response to the conflict in the Middle East.</p> <p>Slovenia’s largest fuel distributor has cautioned that the current interventions may only provide temporary relief and that the country remains heavily reliant on imported refined products from European refineries, some of which source crude from the Middle East. BalkanEnergy quoted Minister Kumer saying there is no immediate threat to national energy security, but that logistical bottlenecks and concentrated cross-border demand have created localized scarcity.</p> <p>The crisis has stirred debate over EU rules on intra‑community fuel purchases. Government officials said measures specifically aimed at foreign buyers could conflict with EU law, so they have instead urged neighbouring capitals to discourage outbound fuel trips by their citizens. Critics say that approach highlights the vulnerability of smaller member states when supply disruptions interact with free movement across borders.</p> <p>Agricultural firms and road hauliers have been particularly affected because diesel is central to their operations; many rushed to secure fuel ahead of restrictions, pushing up demand further. The government has called on distributors to improve coordination and provide frequent updates on station stocks to inform policy decisions, while Prime Minister Robert Golob has not ruled out additional steps, including tighter controls on purchases by non-residents.</p> <p>As Europe contends with higher energy costs and strained supply chains, analysts say Slovenia’s experience illustrates how geopolitical shocks in distant theatres can quickly translate into domestic shortages and heavier state intervention. According to Cadena SER, unless international pressures ease and distribution systems adapt, other countries in the region could face similar measures.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69c21bf0d85cb0be34fdc28aTue, 24 Mar 2026 15:05:37 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/24/gulf-conflict-disrupts-global-fertiliser-supply-chains-and-reshapes-us-farming-decisions<p>Recent Middle East violence has triggered a surge in fertiliser and energy costs, prompting farmers in the US to rethink planting strategies amid supply disruptions and market volatility.</p><p>Recent violence in the Middle East has transmitted far beyond the battlefields, unsettling energy supplies, freight routes and fertilizer markets in a way that is already reshaping planting decisions and farm economics across the United States. According to Lawbc.com, disruptions to shipments of ammonia, urea, phosphates and sulfur, together with interruptions to liquefied natural gas flows through the Persian Gulf, have sent input costs sharply higher just as growers move into the spring purchasing window.</p> <p>Industry observers say the link between fertiliser manufacture and natural gas leaves nutrient prices acutely sensitive to any interruption in Gulf energy exports. The International Energy Agency’s director, Fatih Birol, warned that the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz represents “the greatest global energy security threat in history,” saying attacks and counter‑strikes have paralysed millions of barrels of oil per day and damaged major gas infrastructure, magnifying gas‑price pressure that feeds directly into ammonia and urea production. Le Monde reports the IEA moved to release emergency reserves and urged fuel conservation while stressing that reopening shipping lanes is the only durable remedy.</p> <p>The operational consequences are already visible. Trade and shipping sources report thousands of vessels stalled or rerouted in and around the Gulf and Gulf‑adjacent ports, with major carriers suspending regional services and rerouting ships around Africa. The Associated Press says roughly 3,200 ships are stalled within the Persian Gulf and hundreds more are waiting at nearby ports, a bottleneck that raises freight charges and insurance premiums and lifts the landed cost of imported fertiliser components.</p> <p>Market participants have responded with rapid repricing. CropLife and other industry outlets note that nitrogen markets entered the conflict from a position of tight supply, so even limited interruptions can trigger outsized price moves; some reports suggest fertiliser costs have jumped by around 30 percent and, in places, farmers face expectations of price rises approaching 40 percent this season. Asian Morning and other analysts warn traders are pricing in worst‑case outcomes, echoing memories of the 2022 disruption, so pre‑emptive uplifts in offered prices can create a self‑reinforcing spike before physical shortages materialise.</p> <p>Those cost increases are prompting immediate changes on farms. Corn, which typically consumes large quantities of nitrogen, is vulnerable to reduced application or acreage shifts; soybeans, which fix atmospheric nitrogen, are an obvious alternative for some operators. Such adjustments could, in turn, tighten supplies of feed corn and raise costs for livestock producers and biofuel processors. Conversely, higher crude prices can bolster demand for biofuels, a dynamic that may temper some of the pain for corn and soybean markets but leaves outcomes regionally uneven and uncertain.</p> <p>Domestic fertiliser manufacturers are experiencing a different picture. U.S. producers, benefiting from comparatively cheap domestic gas, are expected to see improved margins as global prices climb, and investors have bid up shares of major North American firms in anticipation of stronger returns. According to Lawbc.com, that divergence, upstream sellers profiting while downstream users pay more, illustrates how a single geopolitical shock can redistribute value across a complex supply chain.</p> <p>Policy and supply‑security debates are intensifying. CropLife reports renewed interest in expanding production closer to major consuming regions and in diversifying sourcing, while governments and international agencies are considering strategic interventions to prevent acute shortages. Analysts emphasise, however, that many developing countries lack buffers such as strategic nutrient reserves, leaving smallholder farmers particularly exposed to prolonged price pressure and the risk of yield‑reducing cutbacks.</p> <p>The broader logistics picture compounds the problem. Le Monde and the Associated Press document suspended carrier services, closed corridors and diverted routes that add voyage time and fuel costs; those higher shipping expenses now flow through to import prices for fertiliser and other critical commodities. Industry voices warn that if the Gulf disruptions persist, the ripple effects could extend well beyond a single season, reshaping global trade patterns and prompting longer‑term investments in regional production capacity.</p> <p>For U.S. agriculture, the immediate task for policymakers and supply‑chain actors is to blunt the shock: improve access to domestic and near‑shore nutrient supplies where feasible, support flexible nutrient management practices on farms, and consider targeted measures to protect food‑system resilience. But the episode also underscores a harsher lesson: in an era of tightly linked commodity and energy networks, conflicts thousands of miles away can become an integral part of the calculus about what gets planted, how much is applied and, ultimately, what consumers pay at the grocery store.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69c21bf0d85cb0be34fdc286Tue, 24 Mar 2026 15:05:25 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/24/oil-and-gas-firms-navigate-volatile-trade-and-sanctions-landscape-amid-shifting-us-and-eu-policies<p>As US and EU trade measures evolve rapidly, oil and gas companies must adapt to new tariffs, sanctions, and geopolitical shifts that threaten market access and investment flows, demanding enhanced risk management and strategic agility.</p><p>International trade policy has become a central determinant of strategy and risk for oil and gas firms, reshaping how deals are structured, where capital flows and which markets are accessible. Over the past two years, a series of US executive actions and evolving multilateral sanctions regimes have turned trade measures into de facto instruments of energy diplomacy and commercial leverage.</p> <p>According to the White House, the administration launched its "America First Trade Policy" in January 2025 to confront perceived unfair practices and chronic goods deficits, using tariffs and negotiations to extract concessions and boost domestic industry. That approach has been reinforced by a line of subsequent presidential directives. In April 2025, an executive order opened a Section 232 probe into imports of processed critical minerals and derivative products, signalling the administration’s readiness to treat upstream and downstream supply chains as matters of national resilience. In the same month, a separate order authorised the use of a reciprocal tariff to counteract non‑reciprocal trade practices that are judged to weaken US economic and security interests. More recently, in February 2026 the White House moved to rescind certain earlier tariff actions, revoking duties tied to a range of prior national‑security justifications as part of a recalibration of trade levers. The administration’s statements indicate these measures are intended to be applied dynamically as geopolitical and commercial conditions shift.</p> <p>Those policy swings have immediate implications for cross‑border energy transactions. Tariffs invoked under statutes such as IEEPA, Section 232 and Section 301 have been used not only to protect domestic producers but also as bargaining chips in bilateral negotiations whereby purchasing commitments for oil and gas can be folded into larger trade bargains. The White House fact sheets frame these instruments as tools to secure both economic returns and strategic advantages; industry participants are increasingly treating duty exposure and the prospect of sudden policy reversals as material transaction risks.</p> <p>Sanctions remain a separate and fast‑moving axis of trade policy that directly affects market access and counterpart risk. The European Union continues to maintain broad restrictive measures against Russia in response to its actions in Ukraine, including asset freezes, travel bans and sectoral restrictions affecting finance and energy, measures that have been periodically extended and broadened by the EU’s Council. Those constraints, together with US sanctions on specific actors and sectors, have reconfigured supply routes, investment appetites and partnership decisions across upstream and midstream projects.</p> <p>Elsewhere, developments in the Western Hemisphere are creating fresh, if uncertain, openings. Reporting summarised in recent briefings describes emerging plans for a US–Venezuela energy arrangement that would tie Venezuelan oil exports to corresponding purchases of American goods, a proposal that would, if implemented, reshape regional flows and raise complex legal and compliance questions given prior sanctions regimes. At the same time, mentions of Syria’s sanction relief in some sources point to potential new entrants into markets long closed to western energy capital, though the commercial viability of such openings will depend on the specifics of any unblocking and on the policy stances of European and allied partners.</p> <p>Producers in the Middle East are confronting parallel pressures. EU sustainability regulations and evolving global climate‑related standards are creating a twofold challenge: managing conformity with decarbonisation measures in major consuming markets while seeking opportunities for capital and technology partnerships in the US and elsewhere. The region’s sovereign producers remain active in seeking inward investment even as regulatory and reputational considerations alter the calculus of long‑term project commitments.</p> <p>For dealmakers, three practical imperatives emerge. First, trade and sanctions intelligence must be embedded in diligence processes: tariff exposure, the potential for sudden executive action and the reach of sanctions lists can all upend valuations and disrupt delivery chains. Second, contractual structures should allocate policy risk explicitly, through robust representations, covenants and contingency mechanisms that address duties, export controls and secondary sanctions. Third, scenario planning should reflect a rapidly changeable environment , transactions that look viable under one set of trade rules may become unattractive after a new order or a lifted tariff.</p> <p>Market participants also face reputational and compliance pressures. The use of tariffs as negotiating instruments, and the intertwining of trade policy with national security objectives, mean that commercial choices are increasingly viewed through a geopolitical lens. Companies that fail to demonstrate rigorous compliance and adaptive governance risk legal exposure and investor backlash.</p> <p>Industry advisers caution that the policy landscape is likely to remain unsettled. While some US tariff actions have been revoked, others remain in force or could be reintroduced in response to shifting strategic priorities. The EU’s sanctions on Russia continue to evolve in step with developments on the ground in Ukraine, and potential arrangements with Venezuela or changes in Syria’s status would carry their own legal and commercial complexities.</p> <p>In this environment, oil and gas players are adjusting strategy not only to manage downside exposures but also to capture opportunities created by policy shifts: new trading corridors, reconfigured supply chains and bilateral purchasing agreements can open profitable avenues for firms that combine commercial agility with disciplined compliance. The message from recent policy moves is unambiguous , trade measures will remain a determining factor for the sector, and keeping pace with political and regulatory change is no longer optional for investors and operators.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69c21bf0d85cb0be34fdc282Tue, 24 Mar 2026 15:05:11 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/20/chinas-rapid-tech-advances-challenge-western-cohesion-amid-us-beijing-trip-delay<p>As China accelerates its five-year plan to dominate innovation and reshape global standards, Western democracies face strategic dilemmas amid postponed US President Donald Trump’s Beijing visit and urgent calls for multilateral cooperation to counter Beijing’s technological rise.</p><p>President Donald Trump’s planned trip to Beijing, now postponed from late March amid the Middle East war, coincides with Beijing’s rollout of an expansive five-year technology strategy that seeks to transform China from the globe’s manufacturing workshop into a leading centre of scientific and technological innovation. According to the AI Index 2025 Annual Report, China’s recent advances are narrowing gaps across artificial intelligence metrics once dominated by the United States. In 2024 the United States produced 40 notable AI models compared with China’s 15 and Europe’s three, yet Chinese open-weight models now account for 17.1% of global downloads versus 15.8% for US models, a dramatic shift from roughly 60% US share two years earlier. The report also finds China maintaining advantages in academic publications and patents. </p> <p>Those trends mirror broader findings from independent trackers. A December 2025 analysis by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, summarised in Nature, reports that China leads research in the majority of critical technology fields , 66 of 74 in that study , while an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation assessment from September 2025 puts China ahead in 57 of 64 categories. Reuters earlier characterised Beijing’s five-year plan as an explicit push for technological self-reliance that seeks to blunt external pressure from trade disputes and accelerate domestic innovation. Together, these materials portray a national strategy aimed not only at catching up but at shaping global technical standards and dependencies.</p> <p>That combination of scale, state direction and rapid learning poses strategic dilemmas for Western democracies. CEPA’s analysis argues Washington cannot meet the challenge alone and needs deeper coordination with European and Asian partners. The White House-sponsored Pax Silica initiative , conceived to secure a resilient supply chain for semiconductors and their inputs, from critical minerals and energy to advanced manufacturing and software , embodies that multilateral approach, recognising reciprocal dependencies across allies.</p> <p>The practical limits of unilateral action are evident across supply chains. Europe is heavily dependent on Chinese exports for several essential minerals: auditors in Brussels report the bloc sources seven of 26 examined minerals primarily from China, importing 97% of its magnesium and 71% of its gallium. Historical precedents underline the vulnerability: after a 2010 dispute with Beijing disrupted metals supplies, Japan invested in alternative mining and processing outside China, reducing its exposure. CEPA recommends that the United States and Europe follow Japan’s example and coordinate with Tokyo to diversify raw-material routes.</p> <p>Semiconductor production further illustrates the interdependence. US firms lead chip design , NVIDIA holds an outsized share of processors used in cutting-edge AI , while Taiwan’s TSMC dominates fabrication. European firms supply indispensable tools and materials: ASML’s lithography machines and imec’s research in Leuven underpin advances in chipmaking that neither US design houses nor Taiwanese foundries could fully replicate alone. The UK’s chip-design legacy, centred on Arm, also forms an integral part of this cross-continental ecosystem.</p> <p>Beyond hardware, Western strengths remain distributed. Europe retains deep research capabilities in quantum computing and biotechnology and led vaccine development during the COVID-19 pandemic, while Japan remains a global robot-manufacturing powerhouse. Yet multiple independent studies warn that democratic partners risk self-harm if they attempt wholesale replacement of US digital platforms and services. Estimates cited by CEPA suggest that attempting to supplant American technology across the European economy would cost trillions of euros and likely slow innovation rather than accelerate it.</p> <p>The geopolitical stakes extend to rule-setting. Analysts caution that if Beijing consolidates technical leadership it could use standards, export controls and supply-chain leverage for coercive ends. The evidence cited by think-tanks and industry trackers shows China investing both in domestic capabilities and in efforts to shape norms and regulations abroad.</p> <p>Policy responses suggested by analysts range from tightening allied cooperation on critical mineral sourcing and semiconductor manufacturing to deeper alignment on export controls, research collaboration and standards-setting. The Pax Silica concept attempts to marry those elements by linking North American, European and Asian capacities in a single supply-chain framework. Proponents argue that such integration preserves competitive advantages while reducing dependencies that adversaries might exploit.</p> <p>The immediate calendar complicates diplomacy. The US administration’s decision to delay the Beijing visit reflects short-term security concerns, yet analysts warn that postponement must not become prolonged disengagement. If Western democracies fragment their industrial strategies or pursue costly autarky, they risk ceding innovation leadership to a state-directed ecosystem that is rapidly scaling research, patents and productisation.</p> <p>The converging evidence from academic indices, policy think-tanks and market metrics suggests a simple strategic choice: either align transatlantic and Indo-Pacific strengths to preserve a rules-based technological order, or accept a future where China’s model increasingly sets the terms of global tech competition.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69ba3392b0f511ed0d54112dFri, 20 Mar 2026 01:24:10 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/20/hormuz-shutdown-prompts-global-rethinking-of-energy-strategies-and-dependencies<p>The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has disrupted global energy supplies, triggering urgent policy shifts towards diversification, strategic reserves, and nuclear investment amid rising oil prices and geopolitical tensions.</p><p>The closure of the Strait of Hormuz after attacks on Feb. 28 has jolted energy policy debates worldwide, reviving questions about how to reduce long-term reliance on oil and liquefied natural gas that flow through that chokepoint. The blockade has interrupted roughly a fifth of global oil and LNG shipments and prompted urgent shifts in strategy from atomic power to strategic stockpiles and supplier diversification.</p> <p>"The issue of energy security has never been as acute as now. Until a few weeks ago, markets took Gulf resources for granted. That will not be the case going forward," said Geoffrey Pyatt, who served as assistant secretary of state for energy resources under President Joe Biden and is now a senior managing director at McLarty Associates. According to E&amp;E News, Pyatt is also launching a new practice at McLarty focused on critical minerals and energy, signalling a private-sector push to help companies navigate a more volatile supply landscape.</p> <p>Governments have responded with a mix of short-term measures and longer-term shifts. A coordinated release of emergency crude stocks and calls for consumer conservation have been accompanied by renewed interest in nuclear generation. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described past reductions in nuclear capacity as "a strategic mistake" and the European Union last week announced financial guarantees to support advanced atomic projects. The EU is also exploring temporary changes to its carbon market and state aid to shield consumers from price spikes.</p> <p>Not all accounts agree on the immediate market impact. Industry bodies and the International Energy Agency have described the Hormuz shutdown as among the most serious disruptions to world energy flows; the lead report noted Brent crude has risen above $100 a barrel. By contrast, reporting from the Associated Press cited a 15% jump in Brent to about $84 per barrel, underscoring variation in price readings and timing as markets react. Policymakers say such swings feed political as well as economic urgency, particularly in energy‑importing regions.</p> <p>Asia faces acute exposure because the region imports the bulk of its oil and LNG from the Middle East. According to the Associated Press, countries including Japan, South Korea, India and China are especially vulnerable because of heavy reliance on shipments through Hormuz. Beijing has tried to blunt the shock through sales from strategic reserves and by restricting fuel exports; China’s high electrification rate and rapid expansion of renewables and electric vehicles have also provided partial insulation.</p> <p>Taiwan and Japan illustrate different policy reactions. Taiwan’s economy minister, responding to public pressure after the conflict began, said the island is considering restarting its last nuclear plant while maintaining that any return to atomic power must prioritise safety. Japan has been debating restarts of reactors idled after the 2011 Fukushima crisis and politicians have urged Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi to accelerate measures to reduce import dependence.</p> <p>Supply diversification and market flexibility are other immediate priorities. Governments in Japan, Taiwan, Bangladesh and Pakistan have signalled plans to broaden their import sources and purchase more LNG on the spot market rather than rely exclusively on long‑term contracts tied to Gulf suppliers. Analysts also expect renewed scrutiny of sanctions regimes and export controls as routes for replacing lost Middle East volumes. In Washington, a White House official said the disruption underscored the case for boosting production of fossil fuels to secure reliable supplies, while the administration has eased certain restrictions to allow higher purchases of Russian oil.</p> <p>The crisis is reviving familiar trade‑offs between short‑term energy security and long‑term decarbonisation goals. Europe’s push to shore up nuclear and subsidise consumers sits alongside plans to accelerate renewables; yet some policymakers warn that deepening reliance on foreign-made clean‑energy hardware could create new strategic dependencies. "We're building new dependencies and new problems inside our energy infrastructure by building dependencies, total dependencies, on Chinese hard and software," said Bart Groothuis, a member of the European Parliament.</p> <p>China’s response has emphasised accelerating the clean‑energy transition while expanding emergency reserves and seeking alternative suppliers. Wang Jin, senior fellow at the Beijing Club for International Dialogue, said on the first day of the war that governments worldwide "will reconsider their energy supply lines and production systems and perhaps pay more attention to nuclear and clean energy." China’s position as a leading manufacturer of solar, battery and EV technology gives it leverage as other nations seek to scale low‑carbon alternatives.</p> <p>While the immediate priority remains keeping markets supplied and stabilising household bills, the crisis may reshape longer‑term investment. Industry data and government announcements point to higher interest in strategic storage, modular nuclear and accelerated deployment of renewables, but experts caution that transitions take years and may create fresh geopolitical dependencies. The Iran conflict has underscored how fragile global energy flows remain and has forced policymakers to weigh whether energy security will be pursued through expanded domestic fossil production, greater electrification and renewables, or a renewed embrace of nuclear power.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69bb8427d85cb0be34fcc8fcFri, 20 Mar 2026 01:24:04 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/20/white-house-enhances-crackdown-on-false-made-in-america-claims-amid-rising-enforcement<p>The US administration has ordered a stricter federal crackdown on businesses misrepresenting products as American-made, pointing to increased civil and criminal penalties and tighter scrutiny of origin claims.</p><p>The White House has ordered a stepped-up federal response to businesses that advertise products as American-made when they are not, directing regulators to tighten scrutiny of “Made in America” claims and signalling heightened exposure to both civil and criminal enforcement.</p> <p>According to a White House statement issued on March 13, 2026, the Executive Order titled Ensuring Truthful Advertising of Products Claimed to be Made in America instructs federal agencies to prioritise detection and enforcement against misleading origin claims in commercial and government procurement markets. The statement says the measures aim to give consumers clearer information and to protect firms that genuinely manufacture products in the United States from unfair competition.</p> <p>The Order explicitly tasks the Federal Trade Commission with elevating enforcement against sellers and manufacturers that falsely or misleadingly represent products as Made in America. It also directs the FTC to consider whether an online marketplace’s failure to adopt verification procedures for country-of-origin claims should itself be treated as an unfair or deceptive practice under the Federal Trade Commission Act. According to the White House, agencies with country-of-origin oversight should weigh adopting rules that encourage voluntary labelling for US-made products, and contracting authorities are to more routinely review origin claims tied to government-wide acquisition contracts and similar purchasing vehicles.</p> <p>The Administration warned that contractors or vendors found to misstate product origin in federal procurement will be removed from government purchasing lists and referred to the Department of Justice for potential False Claims Act actions. DOJ enforcement under that statute can result in treble damages and statutory penalties, while FTC matters may lead to injunctive relief and civil fines.</p> <p>The Order builds on existing FTC policy and rulemaking. Industry guidance and the agency’s 1997 Enforcement Policy Statement long set the benchmark that an unqualified Made in USA label should mean the product is “all or virtually all” made in the United States. In July 2021 the FTC finalised a formal rule codifying that standard; the rule applies to labels on packaging, in online listings and in promotional materials, and permits the Commission to seek civil penalties for violations. The FTC’s published guidance for business also describes the elements , including final assembly or processing in the US and the domestic sourcing of components , that typically inform compliance assessments.</p> <p>Administration officials framed the EO as part of broader trade and enforcement priorities. The measure dovetails with recent DOJ initiatives to confront tariff evasion and trade-related fraud. Department of Justice announcements in 2025 established a cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force with the Department of Homeland Security and created a Market, Government, and Consumer Fraud unit in the Criminal Division to pursue large-scale trade and customs fraud, including schemes to evade duties or to obtain government contracts through misrepresentations. Since January 2025, DOJ has publicly disclosed multiple significant enforcement actions and settlements tied to alleged tariff fraud and country-of-origin misstatements; the Order indicates those efforts are likely to continue.</p> <p>For businesses, the practical implications are immediate. Companies that promote the US origin of their products, whether in commercial channels or when bidding for government work, should review labelling practices, supply-chain documentation and internal controls supporting origin assertions. Industry lawyers note that failure to substantiate claims could expose firms to parallel actions by the FTC and DOJ , a combination that may carry substantial monetary and reputational consequences.</p> <p>The White House statement and the Order stop short of creating new statutory definitions of “Made in America,” but by directing interagency action and explicitly connecting origin claims to procurement oversight and False Claims Act referrals, the Administration has signalled a more aggressive enforcement posture aimed at curbing deceptive origin assertions and strengthening protections for American manufacturers.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69bb8427d85cb0be34fcc8e4Fri, 20 Mar 2026 01:23:34 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/20/us-eases-shipping-restrictions-and-venezuela-sanctions-to-stabilise-energy-costs-amid-middle-east-conflict<p>The Biden administration temporarily waives the Jones Act and relaxes Venezuela sanctions in a bid to mitigate rising energy prices caused by Middle East tensions and disruptions in global oil supply.</p><p>The Trump administration moved swiftly this week to blunt a surge in energy costs tied to the war in the Middle East, temporarily waiving a century-old US shipping restriction and loosening limits on trade with Venezuela’s state oil company in a bid to stabilise supply.</p> <p>On Wednesday the White House authorised a 60-day waiver of the Jones Act, the 1920 law that requires cargo moved between US ports to be carried on vessels that are US-built, US-owned and US-flagged. The administration said the temporary measure would allow “vital resources like oil, natural gas, fertilizer and coal to flow freely to US ports for 60 days,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement, adding that the administration “remains committed to continuing to strengthen our critical supply chains.”</p> <p>The waiver came after oil prices jumped following US‑Israeli strikes on Iran on 28 February and Tehran’s subsequent retaliation, which disrupted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz , a waterway that normally conveys about a fifth of global crude and liquefied natural gas in peacetime. Brent North Sea crude rose more than 5 percent earlier on Wednesday, and average US petrol prices have climbed more than 27 percent since the conflict began, according to AAA motor club data, straining household budgets ahead of key midterm elections.</p> <p>Critics say the Jones Act has long raised costs by limiting the pool of ships available for domestic trade. “So this is a dramatic expansion in the number of ships that can be used,” Colin Grabow, associate director at the Cato Institute, told AFP, noting that building a medium‑range tanker in the United States can cost nearly five times as much as in Asia. Grabow said the waiver could ease some supply‑chain pressure but cautioned that if the war continues its effect on prices may be limited: “It can help mitigate some of the disruptions,” he said. “But moving forward, the situation could be less about reducing costs than slowing the rate of increase.”</p> <p>Not all analysts expect a large impact. Josh Lipsky of the Atlantic Council told AFP the waiver “is unlikely to have a significant impact on global energy markets and gas prices,” arguing that the move is too small to offset the principal forces driving volatility in the Gulf. He added that the length of the waiver , 60 days rather than the 30 many anticipated , “may signal a longer conflict however.”</p> <p>Alongside the shipping relief, the Treasury Department issued a licence authorising specified transactions between US entities and Venezuela’s state-owned oil company PDVSA. The Treasury said the licence will “benefit both the United States and Venezuela, while supporting the global energy market by increasing the supply of available oil.” The action builds on a series of earlier Department of the Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control general licences and guidance issued this year that have broadened authorised activities in Venezuela’s energy sector, including General Licence No. 47 and No. 48 and related updates that permit certain exports of diluents and other transactions necessary for oil operations, legal advisers at firms including Hunton Andrews Kurth and Morgan Lewis have explained.</p> <p>The easing of Venezuela sanctions follows a string of regulatory steps since late 2022 that have selectively permitted US firms to engage with PDVSA under narrow conditions. Treasury press releases from recent years show the department has periodically adjusted licences governing Chevron’s joint ventures and other activities to balance policy objectives with commercial realities.</p> <p>Officials said Washington does not plan to restrict US oil and gas exports as part of its response. According to Axios, the White House confirmed on 19 March there were no plans to impose export limits and that other options, including further adjustments to sanctions, were being considered to address high energy prices.</p> <p>Administration spokespeople framed the measures as short‑term fixes while US forces pursue objectives in the region. “This action will allow vital resources like oil, natural gas, fertilizer and coal to flow freely to US ports for 60 days,” Ms Leavitt said. Vice‑President JD Vance, speaking during a visit to a manufacturing plant in Michigan, offered a similar tone of containment: “We've got a rough road ahead of us for the next few weeks, but it's temporary.”</p> <p>Market analysts note that temporary policy steps can relieve near‑term bottlenecks but are unlikely on their own to counter a sustained supply shock while hostilities continue. S&amp;P Global has estimated that complying with Jones Act requirements can add billions of dollars in delivery costs compared with using foreign vessels, underlining why the waiver could ease logistical strain even if it does not fully reverse price gains.</p> <p>The administration has also tapped strategic reserves and examined other interventions intended to bolster crude availability, according to reporting by the Associated Press, reflecting a multi‑pronged effort to limit the domestic impact of disruptions in the Gulf. For consumers, however, relief may be gradual: with significant shares of global energy transiting chokepoints and complex sanction regimes still shaping flows, experts warn that volatility could persist beyond the 60‑day window unless the conflict abates or larger market responses emerge.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69bb8427d85cb0be34fcc8daFri, 20 Mar 2026 01:22:43 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/12/costco-accelerates-growth-with-digital-optimisation-and-urban-expansion-amid-trade-uncertainties<p>Costco reports strong fiscal 2026 Q2 results driven by digital advances, private label growth, and strategic urban store openings, despite ongoing trade headwinds.</p><p>Costco has continued to expand sales and margins even as it navigates renewed trade-headline risk and pursues an aggressive store roll-out, according to company disclosures and market reporting.</p> <p>The warehouse club recorded a strong second quarter for fiscal 2026, with multiple sources showing year‑on‑year revenue gains. The company’s own operating release reported net sales of $68.24 billion for the quarter, with membership fee income at about $1.355 billion and net income just over $2.03 billion. Other outlets that reviewed the results rounded total revenue slightly differently, some citing figures nearer $69.6 billion, but all agree on solid top‑line growth and an uptick in profit. Comparable‑store sales rose across regions, digital channels accelerated, and both customer traffic and average transaction values increased.</p> <p>Digital investment is central to Costco’s performance. The company highlighted improvements to online product pages and more personalised marketing, with digitally‑enabled sales growing in the low‑20s percentage range on a comparable basis, and app visits and average e‑commerce order values both higher. According to reporting on the company’s presentation, personalised product carousels alone generated hundreds of millions in sales during the quarter, while digitally enabled comps outpaced the broader comparable‑store gains.</p> <p>Management pointed to several practical levers behind the resilience. Sourcing flexibility has been deployed to blunt the impact of tariff volatility, moving production between countries where feasible and increasing the penetration of the Kirkland Signature private label, which management says offers a 15–20 per cent price advantage and gives Costco more control over sourcing. The company also continues to prioritise membership economics; paid members totalled more than 82 million worldwide and renewal rates remained close to 90 per cent, a figure corroborated by independent outlets that placed the renewal rate just above 90 per cent for the quarter.</p> <p>On trade policy, the company is operating in a shifting regulatory environment. After a February Supreme Court decision struck down the previous tariff framework, a new global 10 per cent tariff was introduced, leaving retailers to manage an unsettled refund and adjustment process. Management told investors it is monitoring potential repayments of previously collected duties but warned timing is uncertain because administrative and legal steps could delay any refunds. Chief financial commentary reiterated that any returned funds would be channelled back into price leadership initiatives.</p> <p>Expansion remains a major growth engine. Costco opened a handful of net new warehouses during the quarter and has added seven stores year‑to‑date, bringing the global estate to the low 900s. The company reaffirmed a target of roughly 30 net new warehouses annually and said most planned openings through the end of fiscal 2026 will be in the US and Canada. Executives noted newer infill sites are producing higher annualised sales, management cited a recent increase in average annualised sales per new warehouse from about $150 million to roughly $190 million, while creative site solutions, such as multilevel parking, are allowing entry into denser urban catchments. “We’re not changing the model, but we’re getting a little creative with the use of things like parking decks. If we want to get into some of these inner cities, we’re not going to find 25 acres available for us to go into,” Vachris said on the call.</p> <p>Executives pointed to merchandising and category play as additional contributors to momentum. Jewellery and precious metals performed strongly online amid rising bullion prices, and seasonal merchandising for events such as the Chinese New Year boosted sales in targeted categories. Management also emphasised expansion of Kirkland SKUs in apparel, frozen novelties and grocery items as a way to deliver value and protect margins.</p> <p>Taken together, these elements, digital progress, private‑label penetration, pragmatic sourcing adjustments and continued real‑estate growth, help explain how Costco has maintained elevated sales growth despite external pressures. As the company monitors tariff rulings and the administrative path for potential refunds, management signalled any regained duties would be invested to support its price position rather than returned to shareholders.</p> <p>The company’s leadership framed the quarter with a mix of scale and retail fundamentals. As one executive colourfully observed, “Laid out from stem to stem, the roses we sold in the US for Valentine’s Day this year would have stretched from Seattle to New York City and back again.” That operational breadth, combined with rising digital engagement and an expanding store fleet, underpins the retailer’s case that it can keep growing while managing the headwinds of trade policy and land‑constrained expansion.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69b24a6d799d264d6e39a926Thu, 12 Mar 2026 23:09:40 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/12/regional-trade-and-energy-projects-face-existential-threat-amid-iran-afghanistan-and-pakistan-clashes<p>Security tensions in Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are disrupting major regional trade and energy projects, risking delays and a shift towards alternative routes, with implications for Central Asia’s economic diversification strategies.</p><p>Military confrontations in and around Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan are placing at risk a suite of ambitious projects that Central Asian governments have pinned to southbound trade and energy access, threatening plans to diversify away from reliance on Russia and China and to reach Asian and African markets via the Arabian Sea.</p> <p>The intersection of US–Israel strikes on Iran and renewed violence between Pakistan and Afghanistan’s Taliban administration has created both immediate security threats to transit corridors and a wider climate of investor caution that could delay or derail major rail, road, power and pipeline ventures. The combined effects include route insecurity, border closures, rising insurance and transport costs, and the prospect of financiers pausing commitments until stability returns.</p> <p>Key initiatives now exposed include the proposed Uzbekistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan (UAP) railway, the Trans-Afghan rail plans, the CASA‑1000 electricity link and the Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India (TAPI) gas pipeline. The 760‑kilometre UAP railway, envisaged to speed freight between Uzbekistan and Pakistani seaports by roughly five days and to cut transport costs dramatically, was the subject of a trilateral framework agreement to study feasibility signed in Kabul on 17 July 2025, according to reporting by Dawn and Pakistan Today. Pakistan’s leader has described the line as a regional breakthrough and said Islamabad would help attract financing based on the study and business plan, media in Uzbekistan reported. Yet construction and subsequent operations will be difficult to guarantee while Afghan‑Pakistani relations remain hostile.</p> <p>The CASA‑1000 power corridor, intended to export surplus hydropower from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to Afghanistan and Pakistan, resumed activity after a 2021 pause, with the World Bank announcing project resumption in February 2024. Kyrgyz state reporting noted substantial infrastructure progress on its section by late 2024, including completion of substation works and the erection of over a thousand transmission pylons. Still, the circuit’s viability depends on secure cross‑border transmission and on the cooperation of Kabul and Islamabad, both of which face increasing strain.</p> <p>TAPI, which when finished would run some 1,814 km from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan and India with a design capacity of 33 bcm per year, has seen only incremental forward motion. Turkmenistan completed its segment by the end of 2024, while Afghan sections have been slated for progressive completion through 2026. The pipeline’s economics and security guarantees are vulnerable to breakdowns in Taliban–Pakistan relations and to the reluctance of India and other buyers to commit within a contested environment.</p> <p>Beyond these headline projects, conventional road corridors and border crossings that form the backbone of current trade flows are under pressure. Routes through Pakistan such as the Khyber Pass and trunk roads to Karachi and Gwadar face higher risk premiums and potential closures; Afghan arteries linking Kabul with Jalalabad, Kandahar and Mazar‑i‑Sharif are exposed to operational slowdowns during security operations. Islamabad could also suspend elements of the Afghanistan–Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement as a lever against the Taliban, increasing the chance of sudden policy reversals that strand consignments and impede customs operations.</p> <p>Iran’s destabilisation from strikes has compounded the problem. The wider crisis has disrupted tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and prompted rerouting of aircraft and shipping, magnifying costs for regional energy and logistics. Projects that use Iranian territory, most notably the International North‑South Transport Corridor, the Southern Corridor rail upgrades and the Ashgabat Agreement’s Central Asia–Persian Gulf Multimodal Corridor, now face elevated operational and financing risk should Iranian ports or logistics nodes be targeted or subject to tighter sanctions. The Dauletabad–Sarakhs–Khangiran gas link, which already moves roughly 12 bcm annually into Iranian networks, and rail links being developed to connect Central Asia to Chabahar and Bandar Abbas are similarly sensitive to regional escalation.</p> <p>Analysts and officials are increasingly considering alternative routes. The Trans‑Caspian or Middle Corridor through the Caucasus and the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan rail axis offer options that avoid Iran and Pakistan but come with their own capacity limits, higher transit complexity and dependence on cooperation with Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey. China’s Belt and Road planning has been interrupted by the region’s instability, while Persian Gulf financiers may divert capital to reconstruction or defence needs, reducing available project funding.</p> <p>The consequence for Central Asian states is twofold. Economically, exporters and importers confront longer transit times, higher freight and insurance charges, and greater uncertainty in supply chains. Politically, governments lose the strategic benefit of southward access that had been intended to provide alternatives to northern and eastern routes. Nargiza Umarova of the Institute for Advanced International Studies in Tashkent warns that the Southern Corridor is “critical for Central Asia,” but adds that active conflict could force delays, rerouting of freight, and suspension of services as neighbouring states close borders or airspace.</p> <p>Some projects retain momentum despite the turbulence. The World Bank’s CASA‑1000 resumption and national milestones in Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan signal continued commitment by participating capitals. Yet investors and international lenders are likely to demand stronger security and state guarantees before underwriting work that crosses volatile frontiers.</p> <p>If fighting persists or broadens, the practical outcome is likely to be a re‑orientation of trade flows toward safer, if sometimes longer, east‑west corridors and seaports under the control of more stable partners. That realignment would deepen Central Asia’s economic ties with Russia and China and with the Caspian–Caucasus route, while diminishing the near‑term prospects of an integrated north‑south network linking Central Asia with the Indian Ocean.</p> <p>The fate of the region’s southbound gateway now hinges on a fragile political calculus: projects that can be shielded from cross‑border conflict and that attract patient, security‑aware financing may survive; those that depend on uninterrupted Afghan–Pakistani or Iran‑linked transit risk prolonged delay or permanent alteration. For policymakers in Tashkent, Ashgabat, Dushanbe and Bishkek, the immediate task is to safeguard existing corridors where possible while accelerating diversification plans that minimise exposure to active theatres of conflict.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69b24a6d799d264d6e39a910Thu, 12 Mar 2026 23:08:40 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/12/u-s-retailers-face-rising-costs-and-shifting-customer-patterns-amid-ongoing-trade-uncertainties<p>Major American retailers report that tariffs implemented under President Donald Trump are increasing costs, prompting strategic changes and widening the gap between higher-income and lower-income consumers amid economic uncertainty.</p><p>Major American retailers and other large corporations say tariffs instituted under President Donald Trump are driving up costs, altering companies’ plans and squeezing lower-income households even as wealthier consumers continue to spend, according to recent quarterly earnings calls and industry analysis.</p> <p>Executives at Walmart, McDonald’s, Target, Burlington, BJ’s Wholesale Club, Columbia Sportswear, Home Depot and Lowe’s described a common picture: higher import duties and broader economic uncertainty are increasing input costs, prompting price adjustments and forcing some merchants to curtail expansion in tariff-sensitive categories.</p> <p>“We continue to evaluate and have taken actions to mitigate the financial impact of tariffs through a combination of price increases, vendor negotiations, resourcing production, and other tactics,” Columbia Sportswear chief executive Tim Boyle told investors. “For both Spring 2026 and Fall 2026, we increased U.S. pricing by a high single-digit percent. When combined with our other mitigation tactics, our goal in 2026 is to offset the dollar impact of higher tariffs.”</p> <p>Walmart’s finance chief John David Rainey said the chain has worked to blunt grocery inflation, but that “tariff-related costs lifted prices across many categories.” Walmart’s chief executive John Furner added that recent share gains have been concentrated among households with annual incomes above $100,000 while shoppers earning less than $50,000 have become more financially stretched and, in some instances, are living paycheck to paycheck.</p> <p>McDonald’s chief executive Christopher Kempczinski reported a similar split in customer behaviour. “We’ve seen traffic hold up pretty well with upper income consumers and traffic has been pressured with lower income consumers,” he said, adding that lower-income diners tend to be more “value and affordability sensitive” and are likely to remain under pressure through the rest of 2026.</p> <p>Retail leaders said the tariff environment has forced strategic changes beyond pricing. Burlington’s Michael O’Sullivan said the company shelved earlier ambitious sales plans for home goods because of tariff pressures, while BJ’s Wholesale Club chief executive Robert W. Eddy pointed to weakness in home and seasonal categories that are particularly exposed to import levies. “That is where much of our inventory cuts happened, and those two businesses had negative comps,” Eddy said.</p> <p>Uncertainty about trade policy is also complicating planning for the year ahead. Target chief executive Michael Fiddelke warned investors that tariff-related variables remain in flux as companies enter 2026, and BJ’s executive vice-president Laura L. Felice said tariffs could continue to influence inflation, consumer demand and corporate results this year.</p> <p>The pressure extends into home improvement, where weaker housing turnover and higher financing costs have chilled project activity. Home Depot’s chief financial officer Richard McPhail cited historically low housing turnover since 2023 and customers’ anxieties about inflation and job prospects. Lowe’s chief executive Marvin Ellison said subdued consumer confidence and a “lock-in” effect on homeowners were keeping housing starts and renovation demand under pressure, implying a slow recovery.</p> <p>Macroeconomic indicators released alongside earnings suggest the economy cooled at the end of 2025. The Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis reported gross domestic product grew at a 1.4% annualised rate in the fourth quarter, well below earlier quarters and below many economists’ expectations. Federal outlays fell sharply in the quarter, subtracting substantially from headline growth. The February jobs report showed a net decline in payrolls, and earlier employment data were revised down.</p> <p>Beyond retail, the technology sector is being reshaped by automation and artificial intelligence, with analysts linking a notable share of recent sector layoffs to AI-driven restructuring. Financial research platform RationalFX compiled data indicating that roughly 9,238 job cuts worldwide so far this year have been tied to AI implementation and corporate reorganisations, representing about 20% of the 45,363 technology-sector layoffs tracked since the start of 2026. The platform cited major reductions at companies including Block, WiseTech Global, Livspace, eBay and Pinterest, and warned that continued waves of AI-related job losses could exert sustained upward pressure on unemployment in the sector and beyond.</p> <p>Independent analyses and economic commentary underline the trade-offs of expansive tariff programmes. A Congressional Budget Office review found that the broad tariff plan proposed by the Trump administration could reduce the federal deficit over ten years but at the cost of slower growth, higher inflation and weaker household purchasing power. The CBO projected tariffs would add roughly 0.4 percentage points to inflation in 2025 and 2026 and slightly depress annual GDP growth. Morgan Stanley’s chief global economist Seth Carpenter has warned that an abrupt imposition of tariffs would deliver a sizeable negative shock to U.S. growth entering 2026, while Moody’s chief economist Mark Zandi cautioned that tariff-driven price effects could make consumer inflation readings “pretty ugly” by late spring.</p> <p>Not all retailers have responded the same way. According to a report by Costco, the company has absorbed part of tariff-driven costs rather than passing them fully to shoppers and says it intends to return any recovered tariff charges to members through lower prices and improved value. Costco’s steady sales growth, the company told investors, reflects that approach even amid ongoing trade-policy uncertainty.</p> <p>The corporate accounts suggest tariffs are remaking parts of the U.S. marketplace by shifting costs onto consumers, complicating supply chains and changing companies’ investment choices. Industry executives and independent forecasters alike note that the burden is not evenly distributed: higher-income households have so far sustained discretionary purchases, while lower-income consumers are increasingly prioritising value, trimming spend and delaying purchases tied to imports or housing activity.</p> <p>Policy developments are still unfolding. Following judicial rulings that affected earlier tariff measures, the administration has opened new trade investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to examine foreign industrial practices and to recover revenues from invalidated tariffs, according to reporting. Those investigations target manufacturing practices and government supports in multiple trading partners and could prompt further changes in trade policy that companies will need to factor into 2026 planning.</p> <p>For now, retailers say they will continue to manage higher costs through a mix of price adjustments, vendor negotiations, production reshoring where possible and tighter inventory management, while watching how trade actions, inflation readings and consumer confidence evolve in the months ahead.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69b24a6d799d264d6e39a904Thu, 12 Mar 2026 23:07:57 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/11/putin-hints-at-possible-european-energy-restart-amid-political-and-market-tensions<p>Russian President Vladimir Putin signalled a readiness to resume energy supplies to Europe contingent on long-term commercial guarantees, amid escalating geopolitical tensions and EU sanctions plans.</p><p>Russian President Vladimir Putin signalled this week that Moscow could re-engage with European energy buyers if political obstacles were removed, framing the offer as contingent on durable, long-term commercial guarantees rather than a unilateral Russian move.</p> <p>Speaking at a televised meeting with senior government officials and executives from state energy firms including Gazprom, Rosneft and Transneft, Putin said Russia was prepared to restore large-scale oil and gas ties with Europe provided contracts delivered “sustainability and stability” in trade relations, according to Reuters. “If European companies and European buyers suddenly decide to reorient themselves and provide us with long-term, sustainable cooperation, free from political pressures, free from political pressures, then yes, we’ve never refused it. We’re ready to work with Europeans too. But we need some signals from them that they’re ready and willing to work with us and will ensure this sustainability and stability,” he said.</p> <p>Putin framed the pause in energy shipments to Europe as the result of political decisions in Brussels and national capitals rather than a permanent Russian policy shift. Reuters reports he stressed that Moscow had never closed the door to Europe but sought assurances that future trade would not be subject to recurrent political interference.</p> <p>The comments come as global markets grapple with heightened volatility after US and Israeli strikes on Iran and the risk of supply interruptions through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital artery for seaborne oil. According to Al Jazeera, Putin warned that reorganising Middle Eastern supplies to compensate for any disruption would take time and significant infrastructure investment, and he suggested Russia may favour markets offering stable, long-term demand such as certain eastern European buyers.</p> <p>European policy is moving in the opposite direction. Al Jazeera reports the European Commission plans additional restrictions on Russian hydrocarbons from 25 April, with an envisaged full ban on pipeline gas imports by the end of 2027. The Independent says Putin has even floated the idea of cutting supplies to Europe in response to those EU plans, instructing the government to explore redirecting exports to more attractive markets. The South China Morning Post similarly noted Moscow’s warnings that a spike in energy prices linked to the Iran crisis has made alternative buyers willing to pay premium prices, creating an incentive to reroute exports away from Europe.</p> <p>Market analysts say that while Russia retains the production capacity to increase shipments, practical and political hurdles are substantial. Redirecting pipeline flows and LNG cargoes requires contractual renegotiations, new logistics and, in some cases, infrastructure that cannot be arranged overnight. Industry commentators also point to the unpredictability of demand and sanctions regimes as impediments to swift realignment.</p> <p>European governments face a difficult calculus. A return of Russian hydrocarbons under long-term contracts could relieve short-term price pressures and ease supply anxieties, but it would also raise profound political and strategic questions about dependency and the leverage Moscow could regain. Brussels has repeatedly defended its sanctions as a response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, arguing they are part of a broader policy to reduce reliance on Moscow for energy security.</p> <p>Moscow’s posture mixes inducement with leverage. Putin’s public offer, framed around the language of commercial certainty, serves both as an overture to buyers and as a reminder that Russia remains a major supplier with options to reallocate sales where prices and political risk are more favourable. As the situation in the Middle East continues to unsettle global flows, European capitals will have to weigh near-term market relief against the long-term strategic aim of diversifying away from Russian energy.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69afa6f784dd7ea0520db6aeWed, 11 Mar 2026 00:34:21 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/11/global-trade-disrupted-by-sustained-maritime-conflicts-and-geopolitical-shifts-in-2026<p>Prolonged conflicts in key maritime chokepoints, notably the Red Sea and Strait of Hormuz, have rewritten the rules of global trade, forcing industries and fintech firms to adapt to a new era of persistent geopolitical risk and supply chain fragility.</p><p>The fragile geometry of global trade has been rewritten by a convergence of maritime threats and state-on-state confrontation that, through early March 2026, has imposed a new pricing regime on commodities and forced fintech firms to rethink risk modelling.</p> <p>According to bobsguide, a “dual-chokepoint” shock , the prolonged disruption of the Red Sea trade corridor combined with a near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz , has shifted geopolitical risk from an episodic factor into a persistent pricing input for markets and the technology that serves them. The rapid escalation that began with renewed Red Sea attacks in late 2023 and broadened into a region-wide crisis by 2024 accelerated again after the strikes and counter‑strikes surrounding 28 February 2026, producing immediate and wide-ranging effects on energy, food, fertiliser and shipping costs.</p> <p>Maritime rerouting and lengthened voyages have become structural. World Bank data show that by October 2024 voyages that formerly used the Red Sea had increased distances by roughly 48% for cargo ships and 38% for tankers, with travel times rising by up to 45% for cargo and 28% for tankers. Those longer journeys and the diversion of vessels around the Cape of Good Hope have created a tighter seaborne logistics picture and higher freight costs, the World Bank reported, and have contributed to a substantial accumulation of delayed container capacity in Eastern Mediterranean and Arabian Gulf ports.</p> <p>Economic research and industry analysis quantify the pass-through. J.P. Morgan Research estimated the repositioning of trade and the spike in freight could add materially to goods inflation, projecting as much as a 0.7 percentage point uplift to global core goods inflation during the acute phase of disruption. The IMF documented severe falls in canal traffic in early 2024 , Suez Canal volumes halved year-on-year in the first two months of that year , and warned of longer transit times that have strained inventories and disrupted just‑in‑time manufacturing.</p> <p>The energy market has been particularly volatile. Reporting compiled by bobsguide places the effective disruption of Strait of Hormuz oil and LNG flows at about 20% of global trade as of 4 March 2026, a development that coincided with sharp oil and gas price moves. Independent chronologies of the wider 2026 Hormuz crisis indicate that targeted strikes and retaliation around 28 February led to missile and drone exchanges and a marked withdrawal of commercial transit, pushing Brent well above levels seen in prior weeks and, in some accounts, beyond the $100 per barrel threshold in early March. European wholesale gas prices have also surged amid reports of attacks on LNG infrastructure, creating acute margin and liquidity pressures for energy‑intensive industries and the financial platforms that support them.</p> <p>Commodity markets beyond hydrocarbons have felt the ripple effects. Fertiliser supplies were weakened where shipments transited the Gulf lanes, with immediate knock‑on risks for crop inputs and food production. Agricultural oils and other energy‑sensitive commodities have moved higher as freight and feedstock costs rise. Gold and other safe‑haven assets have attracted flows as investor uncertainty intensified.</p> <p>This environment has pushed fintech and trading‑system architects to embed conflict dynamics into pricing and risk tools. Bobsguide notes a rapid adoption of real‑time geopolitical indicators: satellite AIS tracking to monitor vessel rerouting, automated “heat maps” of contested sea lanes and integrations of insurer notices into margin systems. There is heightened interest in tokenised real‑world assets as market participants explore faster, more transparent settlement mechanisms when traditional maritime insurance and correspondent banking frictions widen. At the same time, exchanges and platform operators are hardening cloud and API defences as cyber risks and the potential for state‑linked disruption grow.</p> <p>Governments have responded by elevating strategic resource programmes. According to reporting summarised here, the United States has announced a major stockpiling effort for critical minerals and other strategic inputs, while the UK has tightened measures aimed at curbing sanction‑busting shipping practices. Those moves signal a policy pivot: access to certain commodities is being treated as an element of national resilience rather than a purely commercial concern.</p> <p>Not all figures align on magnitude and timing. The World Bank and IMF emphasise the cumulative, measurable increase in voyage distances, delays and shipping costs through 2024, while industry trackers place the initial shipping diversion and insurance shocks in late 2023 and through 2024. Wikipedia entries summarise the escalation around 28 February 2026 as a further intensification that produced expanded missile and drone exchanges and prompted near‑cessation of traffic through Hormuz. Taken together, the accounts outline a trajectory from episodic attacks to an interconnected, multi‑year disruption that now feeds directly into market pricing and fintech risk frameworks.</p> <p>For market participants the implication is clear: the baseline for commodity and logistics risk has been reset. Firms operating in commodity markets, and the fintech systems that underwrite and trade them, must account for persistent, geopolitically driven scarcity premiums, integrate high‑frequency intelligence into margin and liquidity planning and prepare for supply chains that are longer, costlier and less predictable than before. The era in which geopolitical shocks were treated as temporary perturbations has given way to one where conflict dynamics are a continuous variable in asset valuation and system design.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69afa6f784dd7ea0520db6a6Wed, 11 Mar 2026 00:33:53 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/11/liberty-justice-center-challenges-trump-tariffs-as-court-tests-executive-authority-over-trade-measures<p>The Liberty Justice Center has filed a new lawsuit in the US Court of International Trade against President Trump’s recent tariffs, questioning the constitutional legality of executive trade powers amid broader legal battles.</p><p>The Liberty Justice Center has returned to court, filing a new challenge to President Donald Trump’s most recent set of tariffs on behalf of two small importers, the centre announced on Monday. The complaint, lodged at the US Court of International Trade, names spice importer Burlap &amp; Barrel and toy maker Basic Fun as plaintiffs and seeks to block levies the administration imposed in late February.</p> <p>The suit targets the 10% global tariffs announced after the Supreme Court on 20 February found that earlier duties enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were unconstitutional. The tariffs took effect on 24 February and the White House has signalled an intent to raise them to 15%. According to the Liberty Justice Center, the administration’s use of Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to justify the new duties is likewise impermissible.</p> <p>“Section 122 authorizes temporary tariffs for certain economic conditions that do not currently exist; it is not a general license for the President to tax the American people for reasons Congress never intended,” the Liberty Justice Center’s Jeffrey Schwab , who argued the previous tariff case before the nine justices – said in a statement.</p> <p>The Liberty Justice Center is the same public‑interest litigation group that in April 2025 brought V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, a case challenging the so‑called Liberation Day tariffs imposed under IEEPA. According to the centre, that earlier suit represented five small businesses and argued that unilateral, across‑the‑board global tariffs required congressional authorisation. Industry and the centre said those tariffs disrupted supply chains and raised costs for US firms.</p> <p>Last week the Court of International Trade ordered the government to refund at least $130 billion in previously collected duties, a development that added momentum to fresh litigation. Two dozen states also filed suit on 5 March contesting the administration’s latest tariff measures, broadening the legal challenge beyond private plaintiffs.</p> <p>The new complaint emphasises separation‑of‑powers concerns, arguing that Section 122 does not confer a general taxing power on the executive. Burlap &amp; Barrel, based in New York City, imports spices from small farmers worldwide; Basic Fun, headquartered in Boca Raton, Florida, manufactures toys such as Tonka Trucks in China.</p> <p>The White House has defended the policy. “The President is using his authority granted by Congress to address fundamental international payments problems and to deal with our country’s large and serious balance‑of‑payments deficits,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai told The Post last week. The administration has said it will “vigorously defend” the tariffs in court.</p> <p>The latest filing ensures the constitutionality of the administration’s trade actions will be tested again in the specialised trade court, even as parallel suits proceed. The outcome could determine whether future presidents can deploy similar tariff programmes without explicit congressional legislation.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69afa6f784dd7ea0520db6a8Wed, 11 Mar 2026 00:33:52 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/11/us-considers-easing-russian-oil-restrictions-to-stabilise-global-markets-amid-middle-east-conflict<p>The United States is weighing targeted waivers on Russian crude exports to help alleviate global supply disruptions and curb soaring prices amid escalating Middle East tensions, raising questions over the future of sanctions policy.</p><p>The United States is weighing a loosening of restrictions on Russian crude as part of an effort to relieve pressure on global energy markets disrupted by the widening conflict in the Middle East, according to people familiar with internal deliberations and public statements by senior officials.</p> <p>According to Reuters, options under consideration range from broad delisting of sanctioned cargoes to targeted waivers that would allow specific buyers such as India to import Russian oil without facing U.S. penalties. Administration officials have told outlets such measures are intended to increase the amount of crude available internationally at a time when flows from the Gulf of Hormuz have been disrupted and prices have surged.</p> <p>Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has publicly signalled the Treasury is evaluating whether easing curbs on “hundreds of millions of barrels of sanctioned crude on the water” could help stabilise markets, telling media that unsanctioning some shipments would create supply while stressing the moves are aimed at market relief rather than signalling a broader easing of pressure on Moscow. According to The Guardian and other reports, Bessent said the steps would not be designed to provide significant financial gain to the Russian government.</p> <p>The administration has already taken limited steps. Washington recently authorised a temporary exception to permit Russian cargoes already at sea to be sold to India to offset shortfalls caused by the Middle East escalation. Sources differ on the exact expiry; Reuters reported the authorisation ran through the end of 3 April 2026, while other accounts put the waiver through 4 April. Reuters sources said a further policy announcement could come as soon as Monday, though deliberations were ongoing and no final decision had been taken.</p> <p>U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, speaking to Fox News, sought to draw a distinction between pragmatic market measures and a strategic shift on sanctions, saying: "We just made a pragmatic decision," and "I don't think there's any change in the pressure there… Russia's oil remains sanctioned. There's no change in policy towards Russia." The Treasury has similarly framed potential waivers as temporary, market-focused interventions.</p> <p>The proposal exposes an inevitable policy trade-off. Easing constraints on Russian exports could supply additional crude and blunt price spikes that harm consumers and economies worldwide, but Western governments have long used energy restrictions to limit Moscow’s ability to finance its military operations in Ukraine. Kremlin economic adviser Kirill Dmitriev has said discussions with U.S. officials are taking place and argued that sanctions have damaged the world economy, comments reported by TASS and other outlets.</p> <p>Markets have reacted to the prospect of additional supply as an incremental influence rather than a guaranteed cure for elevated prices. Industry commentators noted that unsanctioning oil already loaded on tankers could bring significant volumes to market quickly, but lasting relief would depend on the scope of any delisting and whether buyers respond by increasing purchases. Prices have spiked sharply since the outbreak of hostilities between the United States, Israel and Iran, with some reports citing weekly gains approaching 30 percent at the peak of the move.</p> <p>White House messaging has emphasised contingency planning. A White House spokesperson said the administration had been preparing for energy market volatility before the latest escalation and that "President Trump and his entire energy team have had a strong game plan to keep energy markets stable and will continue to review all credible options," adding that any official policy announcement would come from the president or senior officials.</p> <p>Any change would test the coherence of Western sanctions policy: officials must weigh short-term market stability against the long-term objective of constraining Russian energy revenues. As discussions continue, officials and market participants will be watching closely for the precise terms of any waiver and for signals about whether Washington intends the measures to be temporary, narrowly targeted relief or a more enduring recalibration of sanctions enforcement.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69afa6f784dd7ea0520db6acWed, 11 Mar 2026 00:33:31 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/11/nintendo-joins-us-companies-seeking-refunds-as-supreme-court-rules-tariffs-were-unconstitutional<p>Nintendo and over 2,000 businesses are pursuing refunds from the US government after the Supreme Court declared import levies imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as exceeding presidential authority, sparking a legal and economic showdown.</p><p>Nintendo has joined a wave of companies seeking repayment from the US government after the Supreme Court in February 2026 found that former President Donald Trump exceeded his authority when he imposed wide-ranging import levies under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. According to Nintendo’s court filing, the company is pursuing refunds of the tariffs it paid along with interest, saying it was "substantially harmed" by the measures. The lawsuit was filed on March 6, 2026. </p> <p>The court’s 6-3 decision, widely reported by major outlets, held that IEEPA does not authorise broad tariffs and left unresolved how the billions already collected should be handled. Estimates of the total sums at stake vary: some reports place the amount of challenged collections at roughly $133 billion, while others cite larger figures. Industry lawyers say more than 2,000 businesses have launched similar suits seeking refunds. </p> <p>Customs and Border Protection has asked for time to build a mechanism to process returns; according to The Hill the agency requested a 45-day window to establish procedures, and a judge granted a brief reprieve. Legal advisers and analysts warn that interest is accruing while the process unfolds, with some estimates suggesting the federal government’s liability increases by about $650 million a month in added interest. </p> <p>Even if companies recover money from Washington, experts caution consumers are unlikely to see direct refunds. Determining who ultimately bore the tariff cost is complex: some inventory imported during the tariff period may already have been sold, and businesses could argue they absorbed the expense rather than passing it to customers. Consumer-facing refunds would therefore be difficult to verify and administer. </p> <p>The ruling has not ended trade policy uncertainty. President Trump has signalled plans to pursue alternative legal routes for import restrictions and announced proposals to reintroduce global levies at higher rates. Reporting indicates the administration quickly moved to impose a temporary import tax and floated raising a global tariff rate to 15%, a move that could sustain upward pressure on prices even as earlier tariffs are judicially invalidated. </p> <p>Broader economic factors may also keep consumer prices elevated. Media and industry reports point to continued supply pressures in key technology components, the lingering memory-chip shortfall tied to AI demand, and geopolitical events that have pushed oil prices higher. Those dynamics, analysts say, make it unlikely that technology prices will fall sharply in the near term. </p> <p>Meanwhile regulators and businesses are warning the public to be wary of fraud. With complex litigation and potential future administrative refunds, scammers may try to exploit confusion by contacting individuals about supposed tariff reimbursements. Consumers are advised to treat unsolicited messages with caution and to verify any claims through official channels. </p> <p>Nintendo’s claim now sits alongside a rapidly developing legal and policy story that will shape how, and whether, the proceeds of the disputed tariffs are returned, who ultimately benefits, and how US trade policy will be framed going forward.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69afa6f784dd7ea0520db6a4Wed, 11 Mar 2026 00:33:00 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/11/us-israeli-campaign-against-iran-triggers-global-economic-upheaval-with-rising-energy-and-logistics-costs<p>The escalating US-Israeli campaign against Iran has sent shockwaves through international markets, with surging energy costs, disrupted supply chains, and maritime blockades threatening to slow global growth amid heightened volatility.</p><p>According to The Jerusalem Post, the widening US‑Israeli campaign against Iran has sent shockwaves through global commerce, pushing energy costs higher, disrupting flows of critical raw materials and forcing firms to reconfigure logistics for everything from fresh food to aircraft components. The conflict has effectively shut much regional airspace, paralysed major transit hubs and left tens of thousands of travellers stranded while cargo capacity has tightened and freight rates have climbed.</p> <p>Airlines and travellers have borne the immediate brunt. The closure of Gulf air corridors forced carriers to reroute long‑haul services or cancel them outright, producing the travel sector’s most severe interruption since the COVID‑19 pandemic, according to The Jerusalem Post. Flight cancellations concentrated on Dubai and Doha, two of the world’s busiest international interchange points, have cut passenger volumes and commerce that many regional economies rely upon for tourism and retail spending. J.P. Morgan Asset Management warns that higher jet fuel costs, already amplified by the crisis, will squeeze airline margins further, notably for carriers that do not hedge fuel exposure.</p> <p>The energy shock has been pronounced. Al Jazeera reported that attacks affecting facilities and the temporary closure of the Strait of Hormuz have removed a significant share of global crude and natural gas supply from the market, lifting benchmark prices and inflating shipping premiums. Market coverage by ABC News and analysis from J.P. Morgan indicate that Brent crude spiked sharply in the immediate aftermath of strikes, a movement that risks filtering through to higher pump prices and broader inflationary pressure for importing economies.</p> <p>Industrial raw materials have been disrupted as well. The Jerusalem Post noted production halts at major Gulf aluminium operations and force majeure declarations after shipments could not pass through the strait, sending aluminium quotations higher on the London Metal Exchange and lifting physical premiums in Europe and the United States. Supply interruptions to inputs such as sulphur have also imperilled nickel production in Indonesia, underscoring how regional logistics bottlenecks cascade into manufacturing in distant nations.</p> <p>Manufacturing and retail chains that rely on fast transport are feeling acute strain. The Jerusalem Post reports that airfreight stoppages left shipments for major clothing groups stranded in South Asia, while ForeignBusiness highlights broader cargo rejections and surcharges as carriers abandon Gulf routes and air cargo capacity contracts. That combination threatens inventory cycles for fast fashion and adds to margin pressure for luxury brands already navigating a softer consumer backdrop.</p> <p>Semiconductor supply lines face specific vulnerabilities. South Korean warnings cited in The Jerusalem Post emphasise potential shortages of helium and other niche inputs essential to chip fabrication should the conflict persist. Given there are few substitutes for key gases used in microchip manufacturing, even temporary supply gaps can delay production ramps and risk slowing downstream electronics output globally.</p> <p>Financial markets have reacted with volatility. Coverage gathered from Reuters, ABC News and financial analysts points to downward pressure on equities in affected sectors and heightened risk premia across energy and materials stocks. Wikipedia’s summary of the economic fallout notes the wider possibility that sustained disruptions could contribute to slower growth and higher inflation globally, a concern echoed by J.P. Morgan’s investor briefing on market implications.</p> <p>Governments and companies are scrambling for contingency measures. The Jerusalem Post describes mass repatriation efforts and the use of private aircraft and overland evacuations as temporary fixes for marooned travellers. At the same time, defence procurement and logistics are being reassessed: The Pentagon has reportedly moved to replenish munitions expended in strikes, while also invoking new restrictions around certain AI suppliers as it adjusts procurement practice in the conflict’s wake.</p> <p>The evolving picture suggests that the economic effects will hinge on duration and escalation. According to Middle East Monitor and Al Jazeera, a prolonged closure of strategic choke points or a widening of hostilities would magnify disruptions to energy and shipping, raising the risk of broader inflation and an economic slowdown for nations dependent on Middle Eastern supply. Conversely, partial reopenings of airspace and maritime lanes could alleviate immediate logistical bottlenecks but are unlikely to erase cost shocks already transmitted into commodities and freight markets.</p> <p>For businesses, the imperative is clear: reassess sourcing, expand inventories for critical items where feasible, and factor higher transportation and input costs into near‑term planning. Policymakers face competing priorities, mitigating short‑term consumer pain from energy and food price rises while avoiding policy responses that could tip fragile economies toward recession. As the conflict evolves, firms and governments will need to balance operational resilience with the economic costs of prolonged disruption.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69afa6f684dd7ea0520db696Wed, 11 Mar 2026 00:32:50 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/11/us-cyber-strategy-2026-biden-administration-shifts-towards-offensive-measures-amid-regulatory-cautiousness<p>The White House’s new Cyber Strategy prioritises offensive cyber operations and supply-chain resilience, signalling a more assertive stance in geopolitical and technological competition, while maintaining a cautious regulatory approach that impacts industry compliance and innovation.</p><p>On 6 March 2026 the White House published President Trump’s Cyber Strategy for America, a high-level blueprint that reframes cybersecurity as an instrument of national power and ties defensive priorities closely to broader technological and industrial competition. According to the White House, the document sets six policy pillars intended to marshal unprecedented coordination across government and the private sector to preserve U.S. advantage in cyberspace.</p> <p>The Strategy places active measures against hostile foreign actors at the centre of policy. It states the United States will “deploy the full suite of U.S. government defensive and offensive cyber operations,” and urges incentives for private-sector disruption of adversary networks and the imposition of consequences on those who “act against us.” This posture reflects a continuity with earlier U.S. efforts to disrupt transnational cybercrime and certain ransomware groups, and signals that the Administration views more assertive offensive and deterrent actions as necessary complements to traditional defence.</p> <p>Alongside a coercive orientation toward nation-state threats, the Strategy endorses a lighter-touch regulatory stance. The White House frames cyber defence as best advanced through “streamlined” rules and reduced compliance burdens, seeking clearer liability parameters and closer alignment between regulators and industry. Industry groups welcomed this tone: the information technology industry association ITI described the Strategy as a roadmap to restore strategic focus, streamline regulation, and modernise federal IT procurement. Yet legal advisers caution that the push for deregulatory outcomes remains aspirational; the Strategy does not specify how to resolve the existing patchwork of state and federal privacy and cybersecurity requirements, and significant rulemaking, including under CISA, remains pending.</p> <p>An immediate test will arrive with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s forthcoming rule under the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act, currently targeted for May 2026. According to law firm analysis, the new Strategy departs from elements of the Biden Administration’s 2023 National Cybersecurity Strategy, most notably by stepping back from proposals that emphasised mandatory controls for critical infrastructure and shifting liability toward software developers, but it does not foreclose continued expectations that organisations demonstrate mature cyber risk management.</p> <p>The Strategy foregrounds supply-chain integrity and resilience for critical services such as energy, finance, telecommunications, data centres, water and health care, and signals a preference for domestic sources and vendors where practicable. Firms operating in these sectors should expect sustained government scrutiny of foreign-manufactured components, third-party software and cloud dependencies, and arrangements that could create pathways for state-sponsored intrusion. The Administration’s companion Executive Order on combating cybercrime directs officials to review operational, diplomatic and regulatory tools to disrupt transnational criminal organisations and to develop an action plan, reinforcing the emphasis on coordinated disruption of malicious networks.</p> <p>Artificial intelligence is treated both as a force multiplier for cyber defence and as a novel attack surface. The White House calls for securing the AI technology stack, adopting AI-enabled security tools and protecting data and models from adversarial exploitation. Companies are therefore urged to fold AI-related threats, model poisoning, adversarial inputs and AI-enhanced social engineering, into enterprise threat assessments even as they evaluate AI-powered detection and response capabilities. Legal and procurement teams should expand vendor risk reviews to cover AI suppliers and the provenance of training data.</p> <p>The Strategy also stresses modernisation of federal networks through zero-trust architecture, post‑quantum cryptography and cloud migration, and prioritises procurement reform to clear barriers to adopting best-in-class technology. These federal commitments are likely to shape market demand for post‑quantum and zero‑trust solutions and may alter contractor obligations and procurement expectations for vendors seeking government business.</p> <p>While the Administration speaks of public‑private partnership and collective responsibility, the Strategy leaves open how collaboration will be structured in practice. It invites industry participation in identifying and disrupting threats but stops short of legalising private offensive actions; companies contemplating assertive disruption should proceed cautiously and await clearer statutory or regulatory guidance. The future role and remit of CISA, and any sector-specific information‑sharing or operational arrangements, will be important indicators of how the Administration expects industry to engage.</p> <p>For business leaders the takeaway is straightforward: the Strategy does not reduce the baseline expectation of robust cyber hygiene. Instead it reframes priorities around geopolitical competition and operational resilience. Organisations should reassess nation‑state threat assumptions, deepen supply‑chain scrutiny, harden incident‑response and information‑sharing processes, and integrate AI risk into cyber-risk management. With significant rulemaking and agency decisions yet to unfold, companies should prepare for an uneven regulatory trajectory rather than anticipate a wholesale rollback of prescriptive cyber obligations.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69afa6f784dd7ea0520db6a0Wed, 11 Mar 2026 00:32:50 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/05/united-states-the-trump-doctrine-2026-reshaping-global-trade-geopolitics-and-domestic-policy<p><strong>Shoppers are noticing a new cost reality as Washington’s 15% universal tariff reshapes trade, industry and geopolitics , from supply-chain headaches to resurgent energy exports. Here’s what consumers, businesses and allies should watch as the “America First” agenda remakes the rules of international commerce.</strong></p> <p>Essential Takeaways</p> <ul> <li><span>- </span><strong>Big policy change:</strong> A 15% baseline tariff on most imports aims to onshore manufacturing and raise revenue, altering prices at checkout.</li> <li><span>- </span><strong>Market ripple:</strong> Industrial stocks have a lift, but multinational supply chains face disruption and higher input costs.</li> <li><span>- </span><strong>Geopolitical push:</strong> Tough sanctions and an expanded Middle East alignment are part of a broader “maximum pressure” posture.</li> <li><span>- </span><strong>Domestic pivot:</strong> Deregulation and energy export growth support an “energy dominance” strategy with climate trade-offs.</li> <li><span>- </span><strong>Practical hit:</strong> Households could see an average tariff tax of roughly $1,000 a year, especially for electronics and everyday goods.</li> </ul> <h2>Why the 15% Tariff landed like a thunderclap</h2> <p>The headline policy , a 15% surcharge on most imports , is designed as a blunt tool to rebuild domestic manufacturing and generate federal revenue. You’ll feel it first in the price tags: small-ticket items and consumer electronics are the most exposed, while industry sees costs ripple through complex supply chains. According to reporting, markets reacted quickly with sector winners and losers, and economists warned of possible retaliatory measures from trading partners. If you run a small business that imports parts, expect to reprice or find new suppliers; if you’re a shopper, accept that some bargains are likely to shrink.</p> <h2>What “reciprocal trade” and reshoring mean for consumers</h2> <p>The administration pairs the tariff with incentives to bring chip plants and critical minerals home, aiming to cut reliance on strategic rivals. It’s a makeover of trade policy into industrial strategy: think targeted exemptions in exchange for market access and big subsidies to lure factories. That’s good news for local jobs and certain manufacturers, but it’s also expensive. Early projections suggest the tariff could raise nearly $200 billion in a year, money the White House hopes will help rebalance tax revenue. For households, this translates into a short-term “tariff tax” and a longer-term bet that domestic competition will lower prices , a promise that may take years to prove true.</p> <h2>Geopolitics: sanctions, alliances and a new Middle East push</h2> <p>Trade changes aren’t happening in isolation. The administration has doubled down on sanctions and a “maximum pressure” strategy in the Middle East, tightening the economic screws on key actors while pursuing diplomatic realignments. That strategic mix includes pushing for broader normalisation deals in the region and using energy exports as leverage. According to official briefings, these moves are intended to reduce direct military entanglement while reshaping regional economics. The downside? Tighter sanctions can squeeze global energy markets and add another layer of volatility to prices and trade flows.</p> <h2>Markets, multinationals and the fear of a tit-for-tat trade war</h2> <p>Multinationals are recalibrating fast. Some American industrial stocks have rallied on prospects of reshoring and protection, but firms dependent on global supply chains face higher input costs and operational complexity. Trading partners from the EU to the BRICS bloc have signalled displeasure, raising the real risk of reciprocal tariffs that could increase consumer costs worldwide. Industry reactions range from strategic relocation to legal challenges, and investors are watching for whether these policies prompt concerted global resistance or fragmented bilateral deals.</p> <h2>The domestic angle: deregulation, energy and the DOGE push</h2> <p>At home, a drive to slash bureaucracy has sped approvals for energy and tech projects, boosting exports and lowering domestic fuel prices. The administration’s emphasis on energy independence and export strength gives it diplomatic clout, but it also draws heat from climate advocates. Faster project approvals and relaxed oversight may mean cheaper power bills for now, yet they also lock in long-lived infrastructure choices. For consumers worried about sustainability, this is a trade-off: cheaper energy today versus higher emissions and potential long-term costs.</p> <h2>How to navigate this new trade landscape personally</h2> <p>If you buy electronics, clothing or imported goods regularly, check product origins and be ready for price variability. Small businesses should audit supply chains now and consider alternative suppliers or negotiated tariff pass-throughs. Investors might favour domestic industrials and energy names but balance that with exposure to sectors vulnerable to global retaliation. Finally, watch diplomatic signals: trade policy is now tightly woven with foreign policy, so shifting alliances will affect which goods and sectors are protected or targeted.</p> <p>It's a messy, consequential reset , and whether the tariff becomes a lasting shield or a costly experiment depends on how partners respond and how quickly domestic capacity can scale.</p> <h3>Source Reference Map</h3> <p><strong>Story idea inspired by:</strong> ^{<a href="https://vocal.media/earth/the-trump-doctrine-2026-redefining-global-trade-and-geopolitics-on16en0r6n" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[1]</a>}</p> <p><strong>Sources by paragraph:</strong> - Paragraph 1: ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[2]</a>}, ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[4]</a>} - Paragraph 2: ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[2]</a>}, ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[6]</a>} - Paragraph 3: ^{<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restores-maximum-pressure-on-iran/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[3]</a>}, ^{<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restores-maximum-pressure-on-iran/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[5]</a>} - Paragraph 4: ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[2]</a>}, ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[6]</a>} - Paragraph 5: ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[2]</a>}, ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[6]</a>} - Paragraph 6: ^{<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/28/trump-world-tariff-trade.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[4]</a>}, ^{<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restores-maximum-pressure-on-iran/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">[3]</a>}</p>69a956adc13a9146f650ceadThu, 05 Mar 2026 20:02:52 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/05/ai-driven-cyber-threats-and-geopolitical-tensions-intensify-risks-for-global-logistics-in-2026<p>Emerging cyber threats powered by AI and ongoing geopolitical conflicts are reshaping global supply chains, demanding heightened vigilance and agile response strategies from logistics providers worldwide.</p><p>Artificial intelligence is reshaping risks for global logistics as sharply as storms or geopolitical flashpoints, according to industry and security analyses, forcing shippers and their customers to rethink how freight moves from factory to final mile.</p> <p>According to CrowdStrike’s recent reporting, adversaries are using AI to scale operations and speed attacks, with AI-enabled actors increasing activity by 89% year‑on‑year in 2025. CrowdStrike’s 2026 Global Threat Report finds the average time from initial compromise to lateral movement inside a network fell to 29 minutes last year , a 65% acceleration over 2024 , and documents a fastest observed “breakout” in 2025 of just 27 seconds. As CrowdStrike CEO George Kurtz put it in the firm’s analysis, AI has “elevated less sophisticated threat actors and amplified the most advanced ones.”</p> <p>The consequences for supply chains are acute. Logistic networks are built from interdependent legacy systems, third‑party software and widely trusted operational practices, attributes that make them especially attractive to attackers. According to CrowdStrike, adversaries have shifted away from blunt attacks on single transport links toward compromising upstream software providers and development ecosystems, exploiting that trust to insert malicious code into legitimate software distributions. The company says such supply‑chain intrusions have yielded large returns for some actors; it cites an attack attributed to North Korean operators that led to the theft of US$1.46 billion in cryptocurrency after trojanised software was delivered via a supply‑chain compromise.</p> <p>AI is also changing the tactics and scale of social engineering and ransomware. CrowdStrike’s reports document a 442% jump in vishing driven by generative‑AI deception and a surge in China‑linked espionage activity, with targeting in sectors such as finance, media and manufacturing rising sharply. Its ransomware survey notes 76% of organisations say they cannot match the pace and sophistication of AI‑powered assaults, 48% identify AI‑automated attack chains as today’s greatest ransomware peril, and 85% report that traditional detection approaches are losing effectiveness.</p> <p>Zero‑day vulnerabilities are increasing too. CrowdStrike’s data shows a 42% year‑on‑year rise in zero‑day exploitations in 2025 compared with 2024, heightening the window in which defenders have no patch available to stop an intrusion.</p> <p>These cyber dynamics compound conventional disruptions to sea freight. Geopolitical developments in the Middle East have again distorted global maritime flows. The Strait of Hormuz , the conduit for roughly 40% of liquefied natural gas cargoes and about 40 million barrels of oil per day , has been subject to interruptions that have rippled through tanker and bulk markets and threaten energy buyers in China, India, Japan and the eurozone. At the same time, conflict and related military operations have stymied any rapid return to normal container transits through the Red Sea and Suez corridor, prolonging diversions around the Cape of Good Hope.</p> <p>Ocean freight analytics firm Xeneta’s chief analyst Peter Sand warned that recent U.S.–Israel operations will “shatter hopes of a large‑scale return of container shipping to the Red Sea in 2026,” and predicted severe regional port congestion if Persian Gulf access is restricted. Drewry, the U.K. shipping consultancy, recorded a 122% month‑on‑month rise in blanked sailings in February across key tradelanes, a sign of mounting schedule instability. Diversions around the Cape have lengthened journeys and effectively absorbed roughly 2.5 million 20‑foot equivalent units of capacity, helping blunt overcapacity but increasing voyage times and costs.</p> <p>Macro forecasts point to an uneven outlook. S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence projects global trade growth slowing to about 1.7% in 2026 while fleet expansion is expected to climb by around 4.7%, an imbalance that, combined with the heightened volatility from security and political shocks, promises continued disruption and price swings.</p> <p>For shippers, carriers and consignors the upshot is clear: risk profiles have widened. Cyber threats now target the software and services that underpin logistics as directly as storms or strikes threaten berths and terminals. According to CrowdStrike, the rise of AI‑assisted attacks has created a “distinct security challenge” for supply chains because attackers exploit the implicit trust users place in legitimate software and patching practices.</p> <p>The combined picture demands more frequent and integrated planning. Industry analysts and security firms recommend that logistics operators update routing and contingency plans with greater cadence, harden software‑supply‑chain visibility, and accelerate detection and response capabilities to contend with attacks that move at machine speed. The interplay of faster cyberattacks, rising zero‑day exploitation and continuing maritime disruptions means resilience will be measured not only in spare box capacity or alternative routes, but in how rapidly and reliably companies can detect, isolate and remediate digital breaches while keeping physical goods moving.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a956acc13a9146f650ce99Thu, 05 Mar 2026 20:02:22 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/05/shifting-global-trade-routes-face-upheaval-amid-iran-conflict-and-escalation-in-the-gulf<p>The escalation of hostilities in the Middle East is prompting major shipping and air carriers to reroute, raising costs, delaying deliveries, and threatening global supply chains as the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding airspace become perilous for commercial navigation.</p><p>Global trade routes are under fresh strain as the conflict centred on Iran spreads into the maritime and aviation domains, forcing carriers and shippers to reassess routes, timetables and costs.</p> <p>A vital artery for energy and commerce , the Strait of Hormuz , has become a focal point. Industry observers note that roughly one-fifth of the world’s crude oil moves through the narrow passage between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. According to reporting by AP, the recent outbreak of hostilities has sharply curtailed tanker movements and triggered steep increases in oil prices, with Brent crude jumping into the mid-$80s per barrel on some assessments. Time reports that joint U.S.-Israeli strikes beginning on 28 February 2026, labelled “Operation Epic Fury,” have produced heavy Iranian retaliation and heightened threats to commercial shipping, prompting insurers and shipowners to treat the corridor as effectively unusable in practice.</p> <p>Commercial responses have been decisive. Major shipping lines have announced suspensions of transits through the Hormuz and adjacent waters, while automatic and commercial advisories , even without an official blockade , have dissuaded many operators from using the route. AP reporting describes thousands of vessels stalled or waiting at ports in the Gulf region, and other assessments place the count of idled or delayed ships in the thousands, creating bottlenecks that extend far beyond oil markets to finished goods and bulk commodities.</p> <p>The impact has expanded to air cargo. Several Middle Eastern airspaces have been restricted or closed, forcing carriers to take longer flight paths and curtailing capacity at key hubs such as Dubai. That reduction in lift, combined with greater fuel consumption on detours and potential war-risk surcharges, is pushing airfreight rates higher, particularly for high-value and time-sensitive consignments.</p> <p>Ocean operators are increasingly rerouting services around the Cape of Good Hope to avoid the Middle East and Red Sea. Those longer voyages add days or weeks to transit times and concentrate vessel flows on alternate lanes, aggravating port congestion and inflating fuel and charter costs. Axios observes that while some economies , notably in the United States , may feel less immediate pressure, East Asian importers including Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are more exposed and have already shown market sensitivity to the disruption.</p> <p>The financial effects are manifest in freight and insurance markets. War-risk premiums and special surcharges have surged; industry commentary points to insurance increases in many cases exceeding 50–60% and, in some instances, the outright withdrawal of coverage for voyages through higher-risk areas. Tanker freight rates from the Gulf to major consuming regions have also spiked, and carriers are passing elevated costs down the chain through fuel and security surcharges.</p> <p>Beyond transport costs, the crisis threatens broader supply-chain stability. AP coverage highlights ripple effects on pharmaceuticals shipped from India, semiconductors and electronics from East Asia, and agricultural inputs such as fertilisers. Time and AP accounts note that disruptions to energy flows amplify inflationary pressures and could imperil energy-intensive industries , Taiwan’s chip sector being singled out as particularly vulnerable , while poorer countries in Southeast Asia may face fuel shortages and price rationing.</p> <p>These developments come after earlier maritime security challenges in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, where Houthi attacks have already prompted risk-averse routing and contingency planning. The present escalation compounds those prior stresses, reducing the resilience margins supply chains had rebuilt after the pandemic.</p> <p>What shippers should be doing now is becoming clearer from market practice and expert commentary. Forward planning and longer lead times are essential as transit durations extend and capacity tightens. Companies would be prudent to stress-test their inventory strategies, consider geographic diversification of suppliers, explore multimodal and inland alternatives where feasible, and budget for greater volatility in freight and insurance. Maintaining access to real-time vessel and airspace data and close liaison with logistics partners can help manage disruption and cost escalation. Industry advisers quoted in the coverage recommend scenario planning for peak-season surges and explicitly factoring war-risk premiums into tendering and contract negotiations.</p> <p>Logistics providers are positioning themselves to offer those contingency services. According to the Plane2Sea announcement, the company is offering clients scenario planning, routing analysis and ongoing communication through the shipment lifecycle; other freight forwarders and carriers are offering similar advisory and risk-management products as part of their response.</p> <p>The duration and severity of these trade disruptions hinge on the course of the conflict. Time reports a dramatic shift in the region’s leadership dynamics and continued military exchanges, while analysts warn that sustained instability would deepen pressures on shipping lanes, energy markets and global inflation. For now, businesses reliant on timely imports and exports face a period of heightened uncertainty and must weigh the costs of alternative routing and increased buffer inventories against the risks of further interruption.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a956acc13a9146f650ce97Thu, 05 Mar 2026 20:02:15 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/05/iran-conflict-disrupts-global-supply-chains-beyond-oil-prices<p>The ongoing Iran conflict is causing significant delays and increased costs across shipping and air freight networks, risking shortages and price hikes for essential goods worldwide.</p><p>The war centred on Iran has constricted more than crude: it is propagating delays and added costs across global maritime and air freight networks, threatening supplies of everything from medicines and microchips to fertiliser feedstocks.</p> <p>According to the Associated Press, tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has all but stopped, leaving a significant number of vessels immobilised in the Persian Gulf or rerouted on far longer voyages. Shipping analytics firm Clarksons Research estimates roughly 3,200 ships, about 4% of global tonnage, are idle inside the Gulf, though that total includes some 1,231 vessels whose operations are typically confined to the region. About 500 ships, equal to roughly 1% of global tonnage, are recorded as waiting off UAE and Omani ports. These dislocations, while a small slice of world tonnage, can cascade into wider port congestion and schedule knock‑on effects, industry executives warn.</p> <p>“This is really causing some major impacts within the global supply chain,” said Patrick Penfield, professor of supply chain practice at Syracuse University. “As this conflict keeps progressing, you’ll start to see some shortages, you’ll see some major price increases.”</p> <p>Beyond oil: manufactured goods and inputs at risk</p> <p>The Gulf region is not only a conduit for about one‑fifth of global crude; it is also a source of petrochemical feedstocks and nitrogenated products used to make plastics and fertiliser. In addition, cargo routed through Middle Eastern maritime chokepoints carries high‑value and time‑sensitive shipments: pharmaceuticals manufactured in India, semiconductors and batteries produced in Asia, and other components that underpin manufacturing worldwide. Industry observers say prolonged disruption raises the prospect of shortages and higher prices for those goods.</p> <p>Maritime carriers are already altering operations to avoid the most exposed waterways. Major liner Maersk, having resumed some transits of the Suez corridor and Red Sea, announced it was rerouting vessels around the Cape of Good Hope to sidestep volatile zones. The detour can tack on an extra 10 to 14 days to voyage times and, by one industry estimate, around $1 million in additional fuel per ship. Higher fuel consumption, extended sailings and heightened exposure to conflict have prompted carriers to levy fuel and “war risk” or “emergency conflict” surcharges, increasing landed costs for shippers and their customers.</p> <p>Air freight strains magnify the problem</p> <p>Air cargo capacity has been squeezed as airlines and states close airspace or ground services in parts of the Gulf, including airports in the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq and Iran. The three large Gulf carriers, Emirates, Qatar Airways and Etihad, operate dedicated freighters and carry substantial volumes in passenger holds; closures therefore remove a significant slice of premium, time‑sensitive capacity. Boeing data cited by industry analysts indicates that although air freight makes up less than 1% of global tonnage, it accounts for about 35% of trade by value because it transports perishable and high‑value goods such as pharmaceuticals and electronics.</p> <p>“Remember, there’s a lot of pharmaceutical products that are made in India and then exported to different countries around the world. If that’s disrupted, that has a huge, huge, huge impact,” said Henry Harteveldt, an airline analyst with Atmosphere Research Group. Airlines are already forecasting tighter belly and freighter capacity, surcharges and added jet‑fuel costs, and logistics specialists expect airfreight rates to rise as demand outstrips available lift.</p> <p>Policy responses and commercial measures</p> <p>Faced with shrinking private insurance and rising premiums for vessels in the region, the US administration moved to offer political‑risk insurance for tankers traversing the Gulf and signalled naval escorts as a contingency. On social media the president said he had instructed the US International Development Finance Corporation to provide such insurance “at a very reasonable price,” and added that the US Navy could escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz if needed. The navy already has destroyers and littoral combat ships deployed in regional waters and has provided protective transits in past crises.</p> <p>Marine insurers had been withdrawing cover or imposing steeper rates before the latest escalation, prompting governments and carriers to consider alternative risk‑sharing arrangements. Even so, rerouting around southern Africa, the cancellation of port calls and temporary closures of key airports will add cost and delay, with freight forwarders and shippers passing some of those increases down the chain.</p> <p>An industry accustomed to shocks</p> <p>Logistics firms say the sector is adaptable after recent years of disruption, pandemic bottlenecks, labour shortages and prior Middle East flare‑ups forced carriers and ports to build contingency plans and flexible routing options. “The specific situation that’s happening is pretty unprecedented, so it’s very unique from that perspective,” Michael Goldman, general manager North America of CARU Containers, told reporters. “(But) for the last few years the industry just kind of runs on disruption. So in terms of our industry having disruption, that is nothing new. That’s more of the same.”</p> <p>Nevertheless, analysts caution that the breadth of goods affected and the interaction of air and sea constraints mean the economic consequences could widen the longer hostilities persist. The combination of stretched inventories for critical medical and electronic components, longer transit times for bulk and containerised cargo, and surcharges on freight may translate into higher consumer prices and supply shortfalls in sensitive sectors unless routes and insurance markets stabilise.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a7e7859de18c186334b350Thu, 05 Mar 2026 00:02:37 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/05/iran-conflict-triggers-unprecedented-disruption-in-global-shipping-routes-and-insurance<p>The escalating conflict involving Iran has caused significant upheaval in global logistics, leading to route suspensions, insurance withdrawals, and rising costs, with lasting implications for supply chains worldwide.</p><p>The widening conflict involving Iran has delivered a sharp shock to global logistics, forcing shipping lines to detour, insurers to withdraw coverage and shippers to absorb new surcharges as routes through the Middle East become increasingly hazardous.</p> <p>Commercial carriers have responded rapidly. Major container operators have suspended sailings, halted bookings to parts of the region and re-routed services around the Cape of Good Hope rather than risk transits through the Red Sea, Suez Canal or Strait of Hormuz. Maersk, MSC and CMA CGM have all announced operational pauses and route changes, while other lines have altered in‑transit voyages or sought shelter for vessels in the Persian Gulf. According to Automotive Logistics, traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has fallen precipitously, with vessel movements down by roughly 70 percent following recent strikes.</p> <p>That contraction in throughput matters: roughly one‑fifth of the world’s crude oil is exported via the Gulf, a concentration that amplifies market sensitivity. The immediate market reaction has already pushed oil and bunker fuel prices higher, feeding through into freight costs via increased bunker adjustment factors and related surcharges.</p> <p>Insurers’ moves have compounded the disruption. According to The Guardian, leading maritime underwriters including Norway’s Gard and Skuld, the UK’s NorthStandard and the London P&amp;I Club, and America’s American Club have cancelled war risk cover for ships operating in the Gulf with effect from 5 March 2026. The withdrawal of war risk policies is likely to deter owners from entering the area and to raise the cost of any voyages that do proceed, as owners and charterers face either higher premiums or the prospect of self‑insuring at elevated risk levels.</p> <p>Ship operators are also implementing emergency levies. Lines have introduced war‑risk or emergency conflict surcharges for cargoes to and from at‑risk ports and waterways to offset rising security, fuel and operational expenses. Hapag‑Lloyd, for example, has signalled a war risk surcharge for cargoes to and from the Upper Gulf and adjacent waters, citing network disruption and equipment constraints as drivers.</p> <p>The human and operational toll is evident. Reports indicate vessels and terminals have suffered damage, and there have been casualties among seafarers. Insurance market reporting, carried by Insurance Journal and tracing Reuters reporting, describes cancellations of war risk cover after at least three tankers were damaged and scores of ships were left unable to proceed around the Strait of Hormuz. Industry groups such as Bimco have documented a marked reluctance among shipowners to risk normal transits through the corridor amid ongoing hostilities.</p> <p>Air freight has been affected in parallel. Several Middle Eastern states have closed or restricted airspace following missile and drone strikes, halting cargo flights to and from these countries and forcing airlines and forwarders to replan routes and schedules.</p> <p>The disruption cascades through supply chains. Extended transit times from route diversions, vessel delays, and equipment bottlenecks can trigger higher inventory carrying costs and shortages of time‑sensitive goods. Automotive Logistics and other supply‑chain observers warn that the combined effect of rerouting, surcharges and insurance gaps will feed through to manufacturers and retailers reliant on just‑in‑time supply.</p> <p>Political rhetoric underscores the strategic stakes. Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill about the U.S.‑Israel strikes on Iran, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, “… our mission and our focus is the destruction of their ballistic missile capabilities and their ability to manufacture them as well as the threat posed by their navy to global shipping." He added, "The hardest hits are yet to come from the U.S. military." That framing suggests military objectives tied directly to restoring maritime security, but the path to any sustained reduction in maritime risk is uncertain and likely protracted.</p> <p>Longer‑term outcomes remain contested. The lead article characterises the removal of state sponsors of regional violence as potentially stabilising for shipping over time; conversely, recent reporting highlights how immediate policy and market responses , insurance cancellations, route suspensions and higher fuel costs , can deepen supply‑chain pain before any security improvements materialise.</p> <p>For shippers, the calculus has shifted: routing decisions must now weigh not only distance and cost but also insurance availability and the political trajectory of the conflict. Industry notices from carriers and advisories from insurers are changing daily; operators and cargo owners are responding with contingency plans, increased use of alternative routing, and the application of conflict surcharges to manage financial exposure.</p> <p>The short‑term picture is therefore one of pronounced disruption and cost escalation as global freight adjusts to closed waterways, withdrawn insurance and an uncertain security environment. Whether the surge in operational pain gives way to a more secure trading environment in due course will depend on how military, diplomatic and commercial actors navigate a volatile and rapidly evolving crisis.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a7e7859de18c186334b34aThu, 05 Mar 2026 00:02:13 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/05/us-scheme-to-insure-gulf-maritime-trade-and-escort-tankers-amid-iran-tensions<p>President Trump has ordered the US Development Finance Corporation to provide political risk insurance and guarantee support for maritime trade through the Gulf, while hinting at naval escorts for tankers amid escalating Iran-related threats, aiming to stabilise oil markets and ensure free navigation.</p><p>President Trump on Tuesday ordered the U.S. Development Finance Corporation to offer political risk insurance and guarantees for maritime trade transiting the Gulf and said the U.S. Navy would escort tankers through the Strait of Hormuz if required, moves intended to keep oil moving amid escalating attacks tied to Iran.</p> <p>“Effective IMMEDIATELY, I have ordered the United States Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide, at a very reasonable price, political risk insurance and guarantees for the Financial Security of ALL Maritime Trade, especially Energy, traveling through the Gulf. This will be available to all Shipping Lines. If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible,” the president said in a post announcing the measures. The statement was followed by short, informal remarks: “And crude... And stonks...”</p> <p>The announcement comes after insurers introduced or tightened “war” clauses that left some vessels effectively unable to secure cover for voyages through the Strait of Hormuz, prompting ships to sit idle and freight costs for supertankers to surge to record levels, industry sources and shipping data show. The immediate market reaction included a sharp fall in crude prices as traders priced in the prospect of government-backed risk support.</p> <p>According to Al Jazeera and ICIS, the DFC move is designed to stabilise maritime commerce disrupted by recent strikes attributed to Iran and to reassure shipping companies and charterers facing sharply higher insurance premiums. The DFC itself said in a press release that its political risk insurance and guaranty products could be mobilised to support American and allied businesses operating in the Middle East, offering cover to shipowners, charterers and key maritime insurers to limit market turmoil.</p> <p>U.S. naval assets are already positioned in the region, and military-focused reporting indicates the Navy has multiple guided‑missile warships and littoral combat ships forward deployed to provide a security presence if escorts are ordered. News from the U.S. Naval Institute noted additional European warships were also moving toward the eastern Mediterranean, reflecting allied concern over freedom of navigation.</p> <p>The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has publicly warned it would treat the Strait as closed and target ships attempting to transit, a stance that underpins Tehran’s leverage over a vital energy chokepoint. Analysts point out that Tehran’s influence depends in part on triggering market panic and insurance-driven disruptions; by substituting a financial backstop for immediate large‑scale military action, Washington aims to blunt that leverage while reserving naval force as a deterrent.</p> <p>The proposal would, in effect, convert part of the U.S. response to maritime threats from a solely kinetic posture into one that combines balance‑sheet support and targeted force protection. Markets and shipping operators will watch closely for the practical terms of any DFC coverage, whether it will be Treasury‑backed, the pricing and eligibility conditions, and how private insurers and reinsurers respond.</p> <p>Critics warn such an approach risks entangling a development finance agency in a high‑risk security environment and could expose U.S. taxpayers to claims arising from combat losses. Supporters argue that without government intervention, sustained closures or insurance blackouts at Hormuz could push oil prices sharply higher and disrupt global trade.</p> <p>As officials roll out the details, the immediate effect has been to calm a jittery oil market and offer a pathway for tankers currently unable to obtain commercial war‑risk cover to resume voyages under U.S. guarantees, with naval escorts available as a last resort. The DFC said it stands ready to provide its products to help preserve the free flow of goods and capital in the region.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a7e7859de18c186334b342Thu, 05 Mar 2026 00:01:54 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/03/05/oil-prices-soar-as-middle-east-conflict-sparks-strait-of-hormuz-supply-crisis<p>Oil prices surged by 10% amid escalating tensions in the Middle East, as tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz ground to a halt, prompting US emergency measures to secure global energy supplies and mitigate price spikes.</p><p>Oil surged sharply this week as fighting in the Middle East sent tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz to a near standstill, stoking fears of a sustained supply shock and forcing the United States to step in with emergency measures.</p> <p>Prices climbed about 10% in the immediate aftermath of US and Israeli military action, reaching their highest level since last June before easing slightly after Washington announced a support package for shippers. According to Lloyds List Intelligence, roughly 200 crude oil and product tankers are now immobilised in the Gulf region after a string of attacks on vessels, while insurers have begun cancelling war-risk cover for ships operating in the area. The strait is critical to global energy flows: about a fifth of the world’s oil and gas passes through the narrow waterway between Iran and the United Arab Emirates, underscoring how concentrated the risk is.</p> <p>In a bid to restore movement and calm markets, President Donald Trump said he had ordered the US International Development Finance Corporation to provide risk insurance to shipping lines, promising "more actions to come". He also told reporters at the White House that the US Navy would escort tankers through the strait if necessary and that the government would offer financial and logistical assistance to keep energy supplies flowing. Speaking on Tuesday, Mr Trump defended the decision to strike, saying "something had to be done" about the Iranian regime and conceding the measures “might lead to high oil prices 'for a little while'”, but adding: "As soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop, I believe lower than even before."</p> <p>Multiple news organisations reported the administration’s package would include political‑risk insurance and guarantees underwritten by the Development Finance Corporation, and that naval escorts could be deployed to protect transiting vessels. According to Al Jazeera and Axios, the offer of cover was pitched as being available at a "very reasonable price", while industry publication Insurance Journal described the move as one of the administration’s most aggressive attempts to blunt an energy shock. Shipping trade press said the measures aim to shield maritime firms from the financial fallout and to reassure markets that crude can continue to move through the Gulf.</p> <p>Markets reacted to the intervention. Commodity reports observed an initial pullback in oil after the insurance announcement, but analysts cautioned that any prolonged interruption to exports could push crude above $100 a barrel, a level that would feed through into higher petrol prices globally. In the United States, where domestic production has moderated the pass‑through from international markets in recent years, a sustained spike would still be felt at the pump, market commentators warned.</p> <p>The White House said Mr Trump was due to meet with Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to co‑ordinate the response and further measures to address the energy disruption. Industry sources and shipping analysts have stressed that while government guarantees and naval protection can reduce short‑term market panic, reopening secure, sustained commercial insurance and ensuring the physical safety of shipping lanes will be decisive for long‑term stability.</p> <p>As governments move to contain the immediate fallout, the episode has highlighted the vulnerability of global energy supply chains to concentrated geographic risks. The combination of concentrated transit routes, suspended private insurance and active hostilities has created a temporary market squeeze that only a return to steady transit and restored insurer confidence will fully relieve.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a7e7859de18c186334b340Thu, 05 Mar 2026 00:01:44 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/02/28/us-supreme-court-ruling-reshapes-european-food-exporters-outlook-amid-ongoing-tariff-uncertainties<p>The Supreme Court's decision restricting the US President's authority to impose tariffs under the IEEPA opens limited opportunities for European food and drink exporters, but broader trade uncertainties persist as policymakers explore alternative measures.</p><p>The US Supreme Court’s February ruling that tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act exceeded presidential authority has opened a narrow door for European food and drink exporters while leaving the wider trade landscape unsettled.</p> <p>According to FoodNavigator, the judgment curtails the President’s ability to unilaterally deploy tariffs under the IEEPA and exposes many measures enacted under that law to legal challenge. That creates immediate, if limited, upside for some European suppliers who have been competing at a price disadvantage in the US market.</p> <p>“On paper, European producers could regain margin and price competitiveness in the US market,” said Simon Geale, executive vice president at supply chain consultancy Proxima. “This would most likely show itself as a correction rather than a surge in new business. These brands are also fighting against consumer habits, which may have changed a little in the interim, so they could well come up short in terms of volumes and revenue.”</p> <p>But industry analysts and legal commentators warn the decision does not mark the end of US tariff activism. According to The Guardian, President Trump condemned the ruling and signalled plans to pursue alternative trade measures. Reporting by Al Jazeera notes that other statutory avenues remain available to the administration, including instruments such as Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act and powers in the Trade Act of 1974 that can be used to impose duties on different legal grounds.</p> <p>Financial and trade analysts say that combination of a curtailed IEEPA and readily available alternative authorities translates into a patchwork of uncertainty rather than a clear rollback. “The ruling dismantles the legal scaffolding, not the building itself,” ING Bank’s Carsten Brzeski and Julian Geib observed, according to FoodNavigator, a formulation echoed by ING’s sector economist Thijs Geijer, who warned that tariff-related uncertainty for food exporters will remain high.</p> <p>Practical consequences for European food businesses are already emerging. Some exporters could see price competitiveness partially restored if contested IEEPA duties are removed or held up in litigation, but any rebound is likely to be gradual and uneven. Proxima’s Geale cautions that even where duties are refunded, reimbursement processes favour the party that actually paid the duty, typically the US importer, so producers may not automatically recover costs unless contractual arrangements provide for that.</p> <p>Legal claims seeking refunds are now more plausible. FoodNavigator reported that the ruling opens the US government to lawsuits from firms arguing the tariffs were unlawfully imposed. PwC’s analysis of the decision says it also clarifies constitutional limits on executive economic action and will prompt a reassessment across government and business of how trade measures are justified and implemented.</p> <p>Supply chains will remain a source of instability. Rabobank’s Cyrille Filott warned that some flows of Chinese packaging into the EU, which had developed partly to avoid US duties, might reroute back to the United States if tariffs are unwound or if alternative measures change relative costs. That could reconfigure logistics and sourcing patterns already altered by recent tariff cycles.</p> <p>Meanwhile, Washington’s swift adoption of a 10% global tariff under other statutory authority after the ruling, reported in industry coverage, illustrates how administrations can pivot to different tools. Such manoeuvres keep the prospect of future levies alive and complicate long-term planning for exporters and retailers.</p> <p>For European exporters the immediate takeaway is mixed: potential short-term relief in price competitiveness and the opening of judicial remedies for some importers, counterbalanced by persistent legal and policy uncertainty. Industry advisers quoted by FoodNavigator recommend that food companies continue to design supply chains for volatility and to review contractual terms governing who bears and can reclaim tariff costs.</p> <p>The Supreme Court’s decision thus resets part of the legal framework for US trade policy without resolving the underlying political choice to use tariffs as a tool. As The Guardian and Al Jazeera both highlight, administrations retain alternative statutory routes to impose duties, meaning exporters should expect an environment in which tariff risk is reduced in some respects but remains a prominent strategic consideration.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a146113d18d0a0ff82efe9Sat, 28 Feb 2026 00:58:38 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/02/28/long-beach-port-maintains-us-dominance-despite-january-slowdown-amidst-trade-policy-uncertainty<p>Although January imports declined due to shippers front-loading cargo to avoid tariffs, the Port of Long Beach remains the busiest in the US, showcasing resilience amid ongoing trade policy ambiguities and shifting freight trends.</p><p>Imports through the Port of Long Beach slipped in January as shippers pulled some freight forward in the previous year to beat tariff changes, yet the California gateway retained its position as the nation’s busiest container port.</p> <p>Port data show loaded import boxes fell 13.1% year‑on‑year to 409,818 twenty‑foot equivalent units (TEUs) in January, while total throughput for the month was 847,765 TEUs, an 11% decline from January 2025. Export volume was largely unchanged at 99,478 TEUs and empty container movements dropped 11.5% to 338,470 TEUs. According to TTNews, CEO Noel Hacegaba told reporters the port nonetheless led U.S. activity last month, outpacing the neighbouring Port of Los Angeles.</p> <p>“Our strong cargo volumes do not suggest we are not being affected by tariffs,” Hacegaba said on Feb. 25, while noting steep year‑over‑year reductions in specific commodity categories: iron and steel tonnage down about 32%, toys and sports equipment off 15%, synthetic fibres down 43%, and salt, sulfur and cement down 21%.</p> <p>The January slowdown follows an exceptionally busy start to 2025. Industry publications recorded that the Port of Long Beach handled a record 952,733 TEUs in January 2025 , a 41.4% jump on the prior year , as retailers accelerated imports amid expectations of higher duties. PortTechnology, Container‑News and AJOT reported that imports, exports and empty container flows all surged in that earlier month as businesses sought to move merchandise ahead of tariff changes.</p> <p>Trade policy uncertainty has added to recent volatility. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on Feb. 25 it could take "a couple months" for the administration to re‑establish the previous tariff framework after a Supreme Court ruling struck down a key element of the president’s global tariff plan. A 10% worldwide levy took effect on Feb. 24, and officials have provided limited detail about how or when the duty might be raised to 15% while maintaining exemptions for major trading partners, prolonging ambiguity for importers and ports alike.</p> <p>Longer term context underscores the sector’s sensitivity to macroeconomic and policy swings. Data from Furniture Today show the port can also experience sharp downturns in weak demand cycles: January 2023 volumes fell dramatically compared with prior years amid softer consumer spending and higher prices.</p> <p>Port officials have framed the recent month’s figures as evidence of underlying resilience. According to PortTechnology, Dr Noel Hacegaba emphasised the facility’s capacity and infrastructure to keep goods moving despite the uncertain trade backdrop. Industry analysts say the coming months will be shaped by how quickly trade policy is clarified and by shifting retailer inventory strategies, factors likely to determine whether throughput rebounds toward last year’s record levels or cools further.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>69a146113d18d0a0ff82efe3Sat, 28 Feb 2026 00:58:06 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/02/23/eu-delays-us-trade-deal-ratification-amid-us-tariff-row<p>European Parliament has paused ratification of the EU–US trade deal following US moves to impose unilateral import duties, raising doubts over the agreement's future amid legal uncertainties and diplomatic tensions.</p><p>Members of the European Parliament have put the ratification of the EU–US trade agreement on hold after fresh moves by the White House to impose unilateral import duties, deepening uncertainty around a deal that was only recently revived.</p> <p>The pause was announced by Bernd Lange, chair of the Parliament’s trade committee, who told colleagues he would propose suspending legislative action until legal advice and firm commitments from Washington are obtained. “renegotiating the agreement.” appears possible, Lange added in a post on X, arguing that recent U.S. tariff decisions have altered the legal foundations of the Turnberry accord and raised questions about whether new duties under Section 122 of the U.S. Trade Act constitute a breach of the deal.</p> <p>The dispute stems from President Donald Trump’s decision to invoke Section 122 to impose a temporary import duty, raising the global U.S. tariff rate to 15 percent from 10 percent. The White House described the February 20 proclamation as a measure to address “fundamental international payments problems” and to rebalance trade in favour of American workers, farmers and manufacturers, according to a fact sheet released by the administration.</p> <p>European reactions have been swift and sceptical. Lange characterised the recent U.S. actions as “pure tariff chaos from the U.S. administration,” writing on X that the moves have produced “only open questions and growing uncertainty for the EU and other U.S. trading partners.” He urged the Parliament’s negotiating team to delay further work “until we have a proper legal assessment and clear commitments from the U.S. side.”</p> <p>The Turnberry agreement, brokered between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and President Trump in July, locks in a framework that would set U.S. tariffs on many EU exports at 15 percent while the EU eliminates duties on a wide range of American industrial goods, including cars. But critics in Europe have warned the pact was sketched only in a short joint statement and lacks predictable legal safeguards. According to an AP report, business groups have complained the arrangement exposes European exporters to steep costs and volatility, particularly after Washington moved to widen tariff measures shortly after the text emerged.</p> <p>Legal uncertainty in the United States compounds the diplomatic strain. U.S. courts are examining the administration’s authority to levy such tariffs, and the use of Section 122 , which permits surcharges of up to 15 percent for up to 150 days unless Congress approves an extension , has been singled out as legally fraught. The White House justification frames the measure as temporary and aimed at correcting a balance-of-payments deficit, according to the administration’s fact sheet.</p> <p>The European Commission has sought to preserve room for negotiation even as mistrust grows. Commission officials including Trade Director-General Sabine Weyand have warned that rejecting the pact could produce worse outcomes for EU exporters, according to reporting by the Associated Press. At the same time, Brussels is pursuing alternative trade ties with partners such as Mexico and Mercosur to reduce reliance on a single market and diversify supply chains.</p> <p>This is not the first time the Parliament has delayed its approval process in response to U.S. pressure. MEPs previously froze progress after a separate episode involving threats over Greenland; the committee later agreed to resume consideration in February, with a plenary vote planned for March, as reported by Euronews. The latest freeze, announced on February 23, follows the new tariff proclamation and a flurry of postelection trade signalling from Washington that has unsettled EU lawmakers.</p> <p>European leaders, including Commission President von der Leyen, have repeatedly emphasised the value of the transatlantic relationship and expressed a willingness to engage in swift talks when opportunities arise. An earlier encounter between von der Leyen and Trump led to a temporary postponement of an announced higher tariff, with both sides indicating readiness to negotiate, according to an AP account of events in May 2025. But the ebb and flow of threats and concessions have left many European businesses and policymakers seeking firmer guarantees before endorsing a treaty that would reshape market access on both sides of the Atlantic.</p> <p>With the Parliament holding the final say on adoption, Lange’s call for an evidence-based pause shifts the spotlight onto Brussels’ demand for clarity: legal analysis of the Turnberry deal’s durability and a U.S. pledge that tariff measures will not undercut the commitments struck in the July accord. Until those conditions are met, the legislative timetable for the agreement remains suspended, prolonging a period of precarious trade relations between the EU and the United States.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>699bdfdffdd6e7d9ff75dcc2Mon, 23 Feb 2026 22:33:19 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/02/23/oil-prices-dip-as-us-tariff-hike-heightens-market-uncertainty<p>Oil markets fell on Monday following President Donald Trump’s decision to raise a temporary import tariff to 15%, stoking fears of reduced demand amid ongoing geopolitical tensions and supply concerns.</p><p>Oil prices eased on Monday as markets digested President Donald Trump’s decision to raise a temporary tariff on imports to 15%, a move that analysts and traders said increases uncertainty about global growth and fuel demand.</p> <p>According to Reuters, Brent fell to about US$71.31 a barrel and US crude to roughly US$65.98 by 2315 GMT, reversing part of last week’s gains that had been driven by rising tensions between the United States and Iran. The tariff increase, announced after the US Supreme Court struck down Mr Trump’s earlier tariff programme, represents the maximum levy permitted under the statute and is scheduled to take effect immediately, with exemptions for critical minerals, metals, pharmaceuticals and USMCA-compliant goods from Canada and Mexico, The Guardian reported on February 21, 2026.</p> <p>Market participants said the tariff move counterbalanced supply-driven upside from geopolitical risk. “The jump in risk premium linked to potential US–Iran hostilities had pushed benchmarks higher last week; the tariff hike has brought those gains under pressure by dimming the demand outlook,” a trader told Reuters.</p> <p>The latest tariff step is the most recent in a sequence of policy actions that have unsettled oil markets over the past year. Anadolu Agency coverage in April and January 2025 linked earlier rounds of US reciprocal tariffs to falls in crude as investors feared curbs on trade would sap fuel consumption. Those pieces also noted that planned production increases from several OPEC+ members have repeatedly weighed on sentiment by enlarging near-term supply prospects.</p> <p>Industry forecasters warn the policy mix could have longer-term consequences for production dynamics. Forbes summarised Wood Mackenzie analysis in May 2025 indicating that sustained price weakness, alongside tariff-driven volatility and cost pressures, risks flattening US oil output in 2025 and prompting a modest decline in 2026 unless prices recover. That outlook underlines how trade policy can ripple through investment decisions in the shale patch and elsewhere.</p> <p>Analysts said the immediate market response will balance three forces: the demand drag from higher trade barriers, the potential for renewed geopolitical risk to lift risk premia, and OPEC+ supply intentions. “For now, the tariff announcement has tilted the balance toward weaker demand expectations, but any escalation in geopolitical tensions could quickly reverse that,” an oil analyst at a major bank said.</p> <p>Government and corporate statements surrounding the tariff change emphasise legal constraints and targeted exemptions. According to The Guardian, the administration carved out certain strategic product categories from the blanket increase, a detail traders flagged as limiting but not eliminating broader economic impact.</p> <p>With prices still sensitive to both policy shifts and geopolitics, market watchers said volatility is likely to persist in the near term as participants reassess consumption forecasts, production plans and the evolving US trade stance.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>699bdfdffdd6e7d9ff75dcbaMon, 23 Feb 2026 22:33:03 +0000http://srmtoday.makes.news/gb/en/spotlight/2026/02/23/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-trump-era-tariffs-renewing-uncertainty-for-new-zealand-exporters<p>The US Supreme Court's ruling against President Trump’s tariff authority has plunged exporters into fresh uncertainty, prompting industries to prepare for potential policy shifts amid ongoing trade tensions with the US.</p><p>Exporters to the United States face renewed uncertainty after the US Supreme Court on Saturday struck down President Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose global tariffs last year, ruling that the statute does not permit the levying of tariffs in peacetime.</p> <p>The 6-3 decision concluded that while IEEPA allows the president to “regulate commerce” with foreign nations to address an economic emergency, it does not confer authority to impose import duties, a move the court said would amount to a sweeping transfer of taxing power from Congress to the executive. According to The Guardian, the ruling marks the first time the court has overturned one of Mr Trump’s second-term policies.</p> <p>New Zealand exporters were among those affected when a 10% tariff was introduced in April 2025 and subsequently raised to 15% in August. Meat, dairy and horticulture industries reported substantial costs: the Meat Industry Association estimated roughly $300 million in reciprocal tariffs on red meat since April, while kiwifruit marketer Zespri said it had incurred about $40 million. Fonterra has declined to specify its losses, though its trade strategy general manager Justine Arroll warned the trade backdrop would stay volatile and additional policy changes remain possible.</p> <p>Within hours of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the White House announced a fresh global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, initially set at 10% and later raised to 15%. Section 122 permits the president to impose duties to address “large and serious” trade deficits, but any such measures are limited to a 150-day duration. The administration has signalled plans to pursue further tariff action under alternative legal authorities, Arroll said.</p> <p>The court’s judgment follows earlier litigation at the United States Court of International Trade, which in May 2025 found that the administration had exceeded its statutory powers; that ruling was appealed and briefly stayed while the case moved through the federal courts. TASS and other outlets noted the Supreme Court emphasised the absence of historical precedent for treating IEEPA as a general grant of tariff authority.</p> <p>For New Zealand exporters, practical questions now centre on whether duties already paid will be returned. The Supreme Court did not rule explicitly on refunds. Chapman Tripp litigation partner Nicola Swan told Farmers Weekly prior to the high court’s decision that while refunds are a normal part of US customs processes, the scale of these tariffs would make any recovery “unusual.” Any remittances, she said, would likely go to US importers, leaving exporters dependent on those buyers to pass refunds downstream.</p> <p>The Trump administration exempted certain foodstuffs, including beef and kiwifruit, from tariffs in November as it sought to ease cost-of-living pressures. After that exemption, beef reverted to the longstanding country-specific quota rate of US4.4c/kg. Fonterra’s group director of global external affairs, Simon Tucker, reiterated that the US remains an important market and that tariffs add costs through supply chains ultimately paid by consumers, according to Rural News.</p> <p>Industry leaders say the final financial impact will take time to determine. Fonterra’s global ingredients president, Richard Allen, told Farmers Weekly it is too early to gauge the full consequences, noting that many of the cooperative’s exports to the US are specialised products the United States does not produce in sufficient quantities, which could blunt some tariff effects.</p> <p>As legal and administrative processes play out, exporters are being advised to maintain strong links with American buyers and to prepare for a fluid policy environment. The Supreme Court’s decision curtails a major expansion of executive trade power, but the rapid turn by the administration to alternative statutory mechanisms demonstrates how quickly the practical consequences for traders can change.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.noahwire.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Noah Wire Services</a></p>699bdfdefdd6e7d9ff75dca6Mon, 23 Feb 2026 22:32:41 +0000