Latest news with #Export-ImportBank
Shafaq News
19 hours ago
- Politics
- Shafaq News
US sanctions Sudan over chemical weapons use
Shafaq News – Washington The United States announced that sanctions targeting Sudan over the alleged use of chemical weapons will officially take effect on Friday, marking a significant escalation in Washington's response to the ongoing conflict in the country. The acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security confirmed that Sudan's government used chemical or biological weapons against its own citizens, a violation of international law. Under the sanctions, all non-humanitarian US assistance to Sudan under the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act will be suspended. Only emergency humanitarian aid, food, and agricultural goods are exempt. The measures also prohibit the sale of defense articles, defense services, and construction-related services to Sudan, in line with the Arms Export Control Act. Additionally, all items listed on the US Munitions List are now barred from export. Military financing for Sudan is terminated, and the country is banned from receiving loans, credit guarantees, or financial support from any US agency, including the Export-Import Bank. The sanctions extend to exports of national security-controlled goods and technology listed under the US Commerce Control List (CCL), except in limited, pre-approved cases. A US official noted that some exemptions will be permitted, including applications for licenses to transfer certain defense items to non-governmental actors in Sudan. Export exceptions may also apply for the maintenance of civilian passenger aircraft under previously established guidelines.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Tariffs will hurt the US 'in the long run,' former Export-Import Bank chair says
Listen and subscribe to Financial Freestyle on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. Though extreme trade tensions eased somewhat after the US and China agreed to a temporary reduction in tariffs, Fred Hochberg, former chair of the Export-Import Bank, said the Trump administration's tariff policies are set up to hurt US consumers. "I think the tariffs are going to hurt us in the long run," Hochberg said on Yahoo Finance's Financial Freestyle (see video above or listen below). This embedded content is not available in your region. Hochberg was the longest-serving chairman in the history of the Export-Import Bank, which was established in 1934 to help provide financing to foreign buyers purchasing US goods. He also served under the Clinton and Obama administrations. According to Hochberg, tariffs are a tax paid by American consumers and companies, and they are "raising the cost for everyday Americans." In April, the first month that many of Trump's tariffs were in effect, consumer prices rose less than expected overall, though some areas, such as furniture, appliances, and toys, saw prices creep up at a faster pace. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet Some economists, however, likened the report to the calm before the storm, explaining that it takes time for tariff effects to filter through the economy. "We really haven't seen the full impact of tariffs come through yet," RBC Capital Markets economist Carrie Freestone told Yahoo Finance after the report. "It's going to be a while for firms to change their behavior and for us to start to see an impact on core goods prices." President Trump has stated that one goal of his tariff policies is to bring more manufacturing jobs back to the US, even if it brings about some pain in the form of price increases. But even with tariffs applied, achieving that could be difficult, Hochberg said. Though the US is the world's second-largest exporter of goods and services, Hochberg estimates that less than 10% of the country's workforce works in manufacturing, and only half of that labor force is directly involved in production. Hochberg argued that there are other ways to encourage US manufacturing in select sectors that wouldn't be as harmful to Americans, like offering tax incentives or reasons to move manufacturing back to the US. "A lot of things we import, we don't make here anymore, nor do we want to make here anymore," he said. "We're not making sneakers and sweatshirts and T-shirts like that, so it's not clear why we would want to go that route. It makes us less competitive." Hochberg also said tariffs are a major problem for intermediate goods like aluminum and steel, even if they are made in the US. The 25% tariff on foreign steel not only makes it more expensive to import those products, he said, but it may also enable US manufacturers to raise their prices alongside the tariffs. "So there's no bargain by buying US-made steel," he said. "They just simply got an opportunity to raise their prices 25% because they don't need to undercut foreign competition." Though Hochberg doesn't see tariffs returning to levels over 100%, he does expect them to remain at a higher level than before Trump took office. He stated that US consumers are estimated to spend "$1,000 to $1,500 per year" more on goods as a result of the tariffs. "We've benefited by the trade going back and forth," Hochberg said. "It shouldn't be open and free, but we have benefited by that. And I think that's at risk now." Every Monday, Financial Freestyle host Ross Mac talks with key guests to discuss their wealth-building journeys and what it takes to build a lasting financial footprint. You can find more episodes on our video hub or watch on your preferred streaming service. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The U.S. Should Aim Higher in Its ‘Minerals for Peace' Deal With Congo
In a small ceremony with oversized implications, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio welcomed his Congolese and Rwandan counterparts to Washington on April 25 for the signing of a U.S.-brokered declaration of principles that could lead to a peace agreement between the two countries. Framed as a step toward regional stability, the accord also marked a deeper shift in U.S. foreign policy. For decades, Washington's diplomacy followed the oil. Today, it follows cobalt and copper. The initiative by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump in Central Africa reflects the new resource geopolitics of the fourth industrial revolution, where control of critical minerals, not petroleum, determines technological primacy in an age of AI, quantum computing and green energy. This diplomatic push follows closely on the heels of the United States' watershed minerals deal with Ukraine—a template for the emerging Trump doctrine of resource-based statecraft. That agreement established a joint reconstruction fund focused on critical minerals development, granting the U.S. preferential access to Ukraine's reserves, even as Kyiv maintains ownership. The Democratic Republic of Congo, with its estimated $24 trillion in mineral reserves, represents an even greater strategic prize in this new competition. Washington's prominent role in the ongoing effort to broker peace between Congo and Rwanda reflects the strategic importance of Kinshasa's mineral wealth. Congo has the world's largest cobalt reserves and substantial copper deposits. As China continues to dominate global critical minerals supply chains, the U.S. is leveraging its diplomatic engagement to stabilize the Great Lakes region of Africa while also securing access to the critical minerals that power next-generation technology, electric vehicles and weapons systems. To get more in-depth news and expert analysis on global affairs from WPR, sign up for our free Daily Review newsletter. The two sides' pledge to hammer out a peace deal mandates expanded mining cooperation with direct U.S. involvement, promising 'significant investments … facilitated by the U.S. government and private sector'—a clear bid to challenge China's dominance in critical minerals supply chains. This initiative follows Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi's proposal in March offering the U.S. access to Congo's mineral reserves in exchange for military support against the Rwandan-backed M23 rebels that have made dramatic advances in eastern Congo since January. The Trump administration expects to finalize the agreements within two months, backed by the Export-Import Bank and International Development Finance Corporation. It remains unclear if Washington will provide military assistance to Congo in the fight against the M23. However, if the recent U.S.-Ukraine minerals agreement is any indication, the chances appear slim. Kyiv was unable to broker security guarantees from the Trump administration for its ongoing conflict with Russia as part of that deal, suggesting that the Tshisekedi government should prepare for a similar outcome. Yet the prospect of a minerals deal demands serious reflection. The U.S. has a long history of transactional engagement with Congo, often prioritizing access to critical minerals over good governance. During World War II, the Congo—then a Belgian colony—emerged as the largest supplier of uranium for the U.S. war effort. In the Cold War era, following Congolese independence, Washington supported the removal of Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba and backed dictator Mobutu Sese Seko—an anti-Soviet ally—as his successor, in exchange for access to cobalt and uranium. Mobutu's 32-year rule institutionalized corruption and weakened Congolese institutions, a legacy that still burdens Congo today. These Cold War echoes are hard to ignore. Today, Blackwater founder Erik Prince is reportedly brokering a deal with the Congolese government for his private military company to oversee security for mining operations as well as taxation of those operations, an arrangement reminiscent of foreign mercenary involvement during Congo's turbulent post-independence era. The Congolese government has also hired foreign security firms, including Bulgaria-based Agemira and Romanian-led Congo Protection, to fight the M23 in eastern Congo, further entrenching the trend of outsourcing security in politically volatile regions. These efforts, however, have delivered mixed results. In January, nearly 300 Romanian mercenaries who were reportedly being paid $5,000 a month surrendered to M23 rebels after the latter seized Goma. These recent negotiations over peace and resource extraction are unfolding in a vastly different global landscape than the Cold War, where China, rather than the Soviet Union, has emerged as the United States' principal strategic rival in Congo. Chinese firms like China Molybdenum Company Limited, or CMOC, and Zijin Mining dominate the Congolese mining sector, controlling 80 percent of its cobalt production, while U.S. companies are largely absent. Arizona-based Freeport-McMoRan exited the Congo in 2020, selling significant mining assets to CMOC. Other than the Bill Gates-backed mining and AI start-up KoBold Metals, which agreed to buy a stake in projects developing Congo's lithium reserves recently, the U.S. commercial presence there remains minimal. China is also Congo's largest trading partner, but growing Congolese dissatisfaction with profit-sharing arrangements as well as environmental damage and labor conditions at Chinese-run mining sites—in addition to Tshisekedi's fight for political survival—has created an opening for U.S. businesses. In principle, this moment offers an opportunity to redefine U.S.-Congo relations. Ideally, Kinshasa would leverage its mineral wealth to forge a partnership delivering broad economic development rather than elite enrichment. Such a path would require security reforms, anti-corruption measures and improvements to the business climate. The Tshisekedi government would need to develop a clear strategy for U.S. companies to operate alongside dominant Chinese interests and articulate a coherent vision for industrialization. Without these reforms, new investments risk perpetuating the paradox of a resource-rich nation plagued by poverty. On the U.S. side, this critical window of opportunity would ideally see a reimagining of U.S. foreign policy in Congo and Africa more broadly. A meaningful shift would demand moving beyond traditional foreign aid models to increase commercial diplomacy and build long-term Congolese capacity in mining and agriculture. Future U.S. engagement in Congo would also prioritize the creation of a more resilient and equitable supply chain that benefits both nations. The ultimate focus would be on establishing a strategic partnership that prioritizes investments in shared objectives, such as human capital development, technological innovation and value-added mineral processing. Such initiatives would position Congo as a sovereign actor in the global mineral supply chain rather than merely an extraction site, as was the case during the Cold War era. Unfortunately, the Trump administration's transactional approach to foreign policy, which prioritizes the pursuit of critical minerals, coupled with the Tshisekedi government's fragility and governance challenges, makes this best-case scenario unlikely. But that doesn't mean giving up on the current diplomatic efforts seeking to bring an end to the conflict eastern Congo. To the contrary, it might be the first step on a path that in the future may lead to more transformative outcomes. But ultimately, those transformative outcomes will be necessary. As the world's demand for critical minerals grows, the DRC's stability is not just an African concern but a global one. And while military assistance and extractive mineral deals may quash conflict for the time being, they are not a path to achieving lasting peace. Innovative strategies that depart from Cold War tactics will be needed, as well as a bilateral relationship between the U.S. and the DRC that is rooted in a shared vision of economic growth and mutual prosperity, and finally grounded in mutual respect, fairness and true partnership. Laura Kupe is a Planetary Politics senior fellow at New America. She is a German-born, Congolese-American attorney who has worked in the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, and as a congressional staffer. The views expressed here are her own. This article is part of an ongoing partnership between World Politics Review and New America's Planetary Politics program, which will focus on the energy transition, the digital revolution and the shifting dynamics of global power blocs, with a particular emphasis on how these factors impact the Global South and global governance. The post The U.S. Should Aim Higher in Its 'Minerals for Peace' Deal With Congo appeared first on World Politics Review.
Business Recorder
15-05-2025
- Business
- Business Recorder
Sri Lanka restructures nearly $931 million in credit lines with India
COLOMBO: Sri Lanka has restructured nearly $931 million in lines of credit and buyers' credit facility agreements with the Indian government, the island nation's finance ministry said on Thursday. The deal between the two countries will facilitate deeper cooperation on multiple projects including an energy hub agreed to during a visit by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi last month. The debt restructuring covers seven line of credit and four buyers credit facility agreements that were made available to Sri Lanka by the Export- Import Bank (EXIM) of India, the finance ministry statement said. New Delhi and Colombo have worked to deepen ties as India's southern neighbour recovers after plunging into financial crisis in 2022. India provided $4 billion in assistance to Sri Lanka to help it weather the tumult including a swap arrangement and other emergency assistance. India's Adani opens giant Sri Lanka container terminal The crisis left Sri Lanka struggling to pay for fuel, medicine and cooking gas. A $2.9 billion bailout from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which approved the fourth review of its program last month, has played a critical role in Sri Lanka's post-crisis recovery. Sri Lanka finalised a deal with Japan, another key creditor in March to restructure $2.5 billion in debt after entering into a preliminary deal with key bilateral lenders last June. It still needs to sign similar agreements with China for about $4.75 billion in debt. Colombo also secured a deal to restructure $12.5 billion of its debt with international bondholders last December.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
15-05-2025
- Business
- Business Standard
Sri Lanka restructures nearly $931 million in credit lines with India
Sri Lanka has restructured nearly $931 million in lines of credit and buyers' credit facility agreements with the Indian government, the island nation's finance ministry said on Thursday. The deal between the two countries will facilitate deeper cooperation on multiple projects including an energy hub agreed to during a visit by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi last month. The debt restructuring covers seven line of credit and four buyers credit facility agreements that were made available to Sri Lanka by the Export- Import Bank (EXIM) of India, the finance ministry statement said. New Delhi and Colombo have worked to deepen ties as India's southern neighbour recovers after plunging into financial crisis in 2022. India provided $4 billion in assistance to Sri Lanka to help it weather the tumult including a swap arrangement and other emergency assistance. The crisis left Sri Lanka struggling to pay for fuel, medicine and cooking gas. A $2.9 billion bailout from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which approved the fourth review of its program last month, has played a critical role in Sri Lanka's post-crisis recovery. Sri Lanka finalised a deal with Japan, another key creditor in March to restructure $2.5 billion in debt after entering into a preliminary deal with key bilateral lenders last June. It still needs to sign similar agreements with China for about $4.75 billion in debt. Colombo also secured a deal to restructure $12.5 billion of its debt with international bondholders last December.
