UNDP urges Thais to unite for a sustainable future

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia
Kanni Wignaraja, UNDP Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
UNDP Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific, Kanni Wignaraja.

A UN official has urged Thailand’s government, private sector, and areas to work together to ensure the village’s long-term prosperity.

The Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific at the United Nations Development Programme ( UNDP ), Kanni Wignaraja, stated in a press conference that these diverse social networks must work together to ensure inclusivity.

She also offered her thoughts on Thailand’s efforts to reach the Sustainable Development Goals ( SDGs ), noting that the country still faces challenges in achieving specific objectives, such as those relating to biodiversity and the well-being of particular populations.

Next month, Ms. Wignaraja traveled to Thailand to take part in the Asia-Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development 2025, which took place between February 25 and February 28 at the UN Conference Center in Bangkok.

She also had the opportunity to meet with a number of officials, business leaders, and members of local neighborhoods.

She emphasized how women and girls are disproportionately affected by environmental decay and waste, and that Thailand, like many other places in the Asia-Pacific area, faces challenges in the SDGs relating to climate action, nature protection, and gender equality.

Women and girls are frequently the hardest strike when you combine the problems of climate change and natural disasters with the effects of environmental degradation, waste management troubles, and waste, she said.

” These problems affect women and girls throughout their entire life, and they manifest in issues like training, job, and equal give.”

She emphasized that all industries may contribute to a coordinated effort to promote equitable growth, particularly when it comes to addressing the negative effects on women and girls.

Ms. Wignaraja even urged Thailand to make use of its rich diversity by adopting policies like sustainability-linked financing to ensure investments prioritize the planet and people, such as those who work in social protection or those who are among the elderly, women, and girls.

When working with the leasing plan, it is crucial to consider the sustainability link financing. But you list the organic assets, and you specify where the ecology indicators are and how much it would cost to borrow them. Therefore, whether you are borrowing as a single family, as a micro-enterprise, or as a larger number at the federal level, she said.

She emphasized the value of working with the government and the private business to bring about long-term change. She urged particularly large corporations to taking responsibility for their impact on the environment and work to restore Thailand’s normal resources.

According to Ms. Wignaraja, “large companies have a huge responsibility not to damage the planet and its natural resources, nor to regenerate and enhance Thailand’s natural assets.” She even urged micro- and bankers to get involved in these combined ventures.

She said that government policies should be focused on people’s needs and incomes. This strategy ensures equal and sustainable growth.

Ms. Wignaraja traveled to Phetchaburi during her time there, where she witnessed the filing of a declaration of intent to promote bioeconomy expenditures that benefit both people and the planet.

With collaborations between the Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning ( ONEp ), Krungthai Bank, and UNDP’s Biodiversity Finance Initiative, Phetchaburi has become a model for public-private investments in biodiversity. The state also has a World Heritage site called Kaeng Krachan National Park and is a Unesco Creative City of Gastronomy.

She cited Phetchaburi as an illustration of how regional governments, businesses, and governments worked together to promote environmental protection while promoting economic growth. The state’s hospitality and shellfish farming initiatives have resulted in diverse growth at the neighborhood level.

Thailand is a fantastic example of how connecting the dots between sectors you promote success while ensuring sustainability, according to Ms. Wignaraja, noting that each state’s special perspective offers an option for development and improvement.

Through the Thailand Policy Lab, Thailand has developed novel ways to involve people in the policy process. The test, which was developed by the National Economic and Social Development Council in cooperation with the UNDP, aims to promote participation in addressing the country’s difficult challenges, particularly as Thailand transitions into an upper-middle-income state.

She continued,” I can see Thailand’s renewed interest and strong commitment to advanceing the sustainable development agenda.” It’s crucial that policies put people’s needs at the center, taking into account intersectionality and changing experiences, even though the SDGs are being localized in Thailand. By doing this, we make sure that everyone involved in the development of a sustainable future, including local governments, local governments, and international partners.

Continue Reading

Govt mulls buying underperforming NPLs

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

focuses on reducing the burden of smaller debtors

PUBLISHED: 24 Mar 2025 at 06: 35

To ease the financial burdens on small-scale debtors, the government has announced plans to purchase non-performing loans ( NPLs ) with outstanding balances below 100, 000 baht.

Pichai Chunhavajira, the deputy prime minister and financing minister, claimed that the government prioritizes small-scale debt reduction because the financial crisis is primarily affecting lower-income groups. The program aims to assist 3.5 million people who are battling a 120 billion baht total bill.

” Financement will be sourced from the Financial Institutions Development Fund ( FIDF) rather than the national budget.” The government plans to restructure these NPLs to give them more manageable payment alternatives, he said, and then buy them from banks for only 1 % of their value.

Because businesses have already deducted these payments from taxable earnings at a 20 % tax price,” the plan to buy NPLs is possible.” Cleaning these defaulted loans may also aid lenders in rewriting their financial statements. Some NPLs have reportedly been sold in past transactions for less than 1 %, according to the minister.

Due to the fact that this category accounts for the majority of lenders and can be helped for a relatively low cost, the decision was made to concentrate on obligations under 100, 000 baht.

These debts, which have been late for more than a year, are primarily unsecured loans or customer debts. With a total debt of 120 billion baht, or about 10 % of all NPLs, this sector has a total of 3.5 million people, or 65 % of all NPL holders.

According to him, “effectively addressing these debts may lower casual financing, lower house loan rates, and enhance consumer purchasing power, finally assisting financial recovery.”

The secretary claimed that the government will only be spending a small sum on this program. The” You Battle, We Help” debt relief program, which was funded by the FIDF and still has between 20 and 30 billion baht available annually, will receive funding from the unused funds of the program.

Before beginning the payments, Mr. Pichai stated that debate with monetary institutions will take place. If successful, a specialized debt management company, either an existing one or a previously established one, will manage the acquired bills.

” The main objective is to ensure the government does not income by allowing lenders to recover at cost price, with only administrative costs added,” said Mr. Pichai.

However, the National Credit Bureau (NCB) won’t quickly replace lenders from their records until they are paid off in full. The state is looking into ways to make them disappear more quickly while also offering other credit options.

Financial assistance from online banks and private lenders that don’t rely on NCB checks might be offered by the Government Savings Bank, which may also offer loans in the range of 10,000 to 120,000 baht. Although interest rates may be a little higher than those for traditional money, they still are considerably lower than those for casual loans, which can yield up to 100 % interest.

Mr. Pichai expressed concern that the government’s plan to buy more debt may promote reckless borrowing. He claimed that the program was created to aid those who can boost the economy.

Continue Reading

Politics trumps economic reform pledge in PM Anwar’s US0 million ‘bailout’ of debt-laden Sapura Energy

By:
On:
In: Asia

ESCUE Dynamics

In exchange for RM1.1 billion that would then be used to pay contractors, subcontractors, and other service providers, Sapura Energy will issue debt equipment known as transferable convertible loan information, which would carry an annual interest rate of 2 %, to the Ministry of Finance in return for RM1.1 billion that would then be used to pay vendors, subcontractors, and other service providers.

The arrangement of Sapura Energy’s exceptional loan will enable the bank’s main lenders, the state-controlled economic institutions Maybank, RHB, and CIMB, to carry out a reform of its outstanding debt.

A director of one of the businesses involved in the financial practice, who declined to be identified because he is not permitted to speak to the media on the grounds of banking secrecy, said,” The offer is not good for the lenders because they will need to take hair on outstanding debts that will need to be amortized in their book.

Banks are referred to as getting less than they are owed, or” cut”.

” But there was no way to carry out a restructuring without the ( government ) injection. The director declined to provide information on the size of the write-off that financial institutions would be required to make under the debt restructuring plan.” With this, Sapura Energy does have a fighting chance to become financially viable once more,” said the director.

However, two additional bankers who were involved in the proposed restructuring noted that Sapura Energy’s debt burden will be decreased from RM10 billion to RMRM5.2 billion following the restructuring exercise, which could take up to six months and require shareholder and regulatory approvals. &nbsp,

Former STOCKMARKET DARLING

Sapura Energy once reigned supreme dominance over the stock market. &nbsp,

The business merged in 2012 between Mokhzani Mahathir, the second son of businessman Shahril Shamsuddin and Mokhzani Mahathir, the result of which the company quickly expanded and expanded internationally, gaining clients like Petrobras of Brazil. &nbsp,

After Saipem SpA of Italy, Sapura Energy was ranked as the second-largest integrated oil and gas services provider in the world at its peak.

Then came the 2014 drop in oil prices, which hit the business that had relied on local financial institutions to fund its rapid expansion. Mokhzani sold his stake in Sapura Energy in 2017 after mounting financial losses.

Shahril remained in charge of the business, but a financial turnaround was unsuccessful due to the high costs involved in paying off the group’s enormous debt.

PNB decided to increase its stake to 40 % in 2018 from roughly 7 % when it issued a new share issue to raise additional funding as Sapura Energy’s financial woes grew. &nbsp,

Although the PNB investment was only about RM2.67 billion, it hasn’t been enough to stop Sapura Energy’s losses, setting the stage for the financial rescue last week.

Continue Reading

Pro-Beijing paper: Anti-sanctions law can block Li’s ports deal – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

A media mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party has suggested using China’s anti-sanctions mechanism to deal with Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-shing’s proposed selling of his global ports, including two at the Panama Canal, to BlackRock.

In its latest article titled “Stop the transaction, avoid losing a lot to save a little,” Ta Kung Pao, a pro-Beijing newspaper, urges Li to scrap his ports deal. 

Since its first attack on Li on March 13, the newspaper has published more than 10 commentaries and news articles on the topic. While previous ones called Li a “traitor” and an unpatriotic businessman, its latest opinion piece mentions a concrete legal tool – the anti-sanctions law – for the first time.

“Both at the national and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region levels, our legal system is quite complete,” writes Wan Yunping. (The name may be a pseudonym as the author has no title and has not published any article before.)

“In response to the United States and Western sanctions in recent years, our country has accumulated rich experience in anti-sanctions and formed an effective response mechanism,” Wan says. “Both the state and the SAR have legal mechanisms to deal with so-called ‘legal transactions’ that harm national interests.”

He says those who have stressed that Li’s proposed deal is a “legitimate transaction” under the principle of freedom of contract are “too naive and senile.”

“From the operational level of commercial mergers and acquisitions, I advise relevant companies and individuals to stop delivery, avoid miscalculations and avoid losing a lot to save a little,” Wan says.

The author also says Li’s deal violates the principle of Hong Kong’s National Security Ordinance, which states that “the highest principle of the policy of ‘one country, two systems’ is to safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests.” The Legislative Council passed the ordinance, drafted on the basis of Article 23 of the Basic Law, in March 2024.

“This transaction directly violates this highest principle as it will hurt China’s national security and development interests,” he says. “Violating the principle of the law is also a violation of the law.”

“Throughout the legal system, not every legal provision directly states the consequences of violation,” he adds. “However, the lack of written legal consequences does not mean the law has no legal effect.”

In August 2021, Beijing suggested extending the coverage of its Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law to Hong Kong by adding it to Annex III of the Basic Law. If implemented, this law would forbid Hong Kong companies and banks from enforcing foreign sanctions against China. 

However, the National People’s Congress (NPC) standing committee finally did not discuss the suggestion after considering that it would put Hong Kong’s banks and financial institutions in a difficult position in the fight between China and the US and trigger capital flight from Hong Kong.

Some observers have said that Beijing can use the existing National Security Law and the potential implementation of the anti-sanctions law in Hong Kong to deal with Li. But Ronny Tong, a legal expert and an Executive Council member, said it’s unlikely that Beijing will intervene in the case with the National Security Law.

“The United Kingdom passed the National Security Investment Act in 2021 to scrutinize outbound and inbound investment, while the United States has also recently banned American companies from investing in China and Chinese companies from investing in the US,” Tong says in a social media post.

“The media and international community did not criticize these restrictions. But if the SAR government intervenes in a case for national security reasons, it will definitely attract overwhelming criticism and smear,” he says. “We have always dealt with things fairly and in accordance with the law. It is the difference between China and the UK-US.”

He says Li must consider whether selling his ports is in the national interest.

It is unclear whether Beijing will block Li’s ports deal with the anti-sanctions law. For that to happen, the NPC Standing Committee needs to hold a meeting before CK Hutchison and the BlackRock-Til consortium sign definitive documentation for the transaction on April 2.

Victor Li’s statement

On March 4, CK Hutchison, Li’s flagship company, announced that it had agreed to sell its entire 80% stake in Hutchison Ports – which owns, operates and develops 43 ports comprising 199 berths in 23 countries – to BlackRock for US$22.8 billion.

After this, Victor Li, the elder son of Li Ka-shing and chairman of CK Hutchison, reportedly met with a “national leader” to discuss the deal in Beijing, but he insisted on continuing the transaction. 

Bloomberg reported on March 18 that senior Chinese leaders ordered several government agencies, including the State Administration for Market Regulation, to scrutinize the deal for any potential security breaches or antitrust violations. Still, the probe would not necessarily result in any follow-up action.

“Looking ahead to 2025, there may be headwinds with supply chain disruptions anticipated in the early part of the year due to shipping lines transitioning into their new alliances, as well as ongoing geopolitical risk impacting global trade,” Victor Li says in CK Hutchison’s 2024 result announcement released on March 20.

He says that the company’s port business will continue to improve this year with moderate organic growth in Asia and the Middle East, expansion at existing terminal facilities and strengthening strategic partnerships.

Revenue from the company’s ports and related services grew 11% to HK$45.3 billion (US$5.83 billion) for the year ended December 31, 2024. The segment’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) increased 19% to HK$16.2 billion.

Pundits’ debate

In China most commentators criticized the 96-year-old Li Ka-shing for selling his global ports to BlackRock, although a few defended him.

A Fujian-based writer using the pseudonym “Xinghua Dabai” says in an article published on Wednesday that Li failed to sell 40% of Hutchison Ports to Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) for about HK$150 billion in 2015 because the premium was too high.

“Many people asked why China did not buy Li’s ports in the past. It’s not that we did not want to buy,” the writer says. “A 2015 news article showed that Chinese buyers felt Li’s asking price was too high. Besides, they did not want to only hold a minority stake.”

The writer says Li’s asking price in 2015 was about 26 to 28 times the assets’ EBITDA, more than double the industry’s 10 to 12 times valuation then. He says now Li offers BlackRock 80% of his port assets for 11 to 13 times EBITDA, compared with the industry’s 9 to 10 times valuation.

He says Li deserves criticism this time because he is selling his ports to BlackRock at a lower valuation. 

“Someone might also ask why China does not buy the ports now,” he says. “Such a deal will involve antitrust probes in 12 jurisdictions, including the European Union, the US and Brazil. Obviously, the US won’t approve it if our SOEs buy Hutchison Ports.”

In an interview, Larry Lang, a Hong Kong-based Taiwanese economist, says Li should not face criticism for selling his own assets, especially when port operation is a declining sector.

Lang says Li won Britain’s trust to acquire Hutchison Whampoa in 1979 and spent decades expanding it; besides, Li is a Canadian citizen and should not be judged on his Chinese patriotism. 

Lang says that, as China has already started building ports and railways overseas in the past decade, the negative impact of Li’s deal on the country will only be temporary.

Yong Jian is a contributor to the Asia Times. He is a Chinese journalist who specializes in Chinese technology, economy and politics. 

Read: China probes Li Ka-shing’s Panama ports deal for security concerns

Read: Beijing calls Li Ka-shing a ‘traitor’ in Panama ports deal

Continue Reading

The still-hopeful future of sustainability – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

There are cycles for the effectiveness of global ideas. If an idea has to overwinter politically for a while, that doesn’t mean it’s over

In today’s world, even the most enthusiastic advocates of the idea of sustainability express one fear: we have to discuss whether the era of sustainability, which started in the 1990s and came to a first global peak in 2015 with the release of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is stagnating – or even coming to an end. 

This fear is understandable. Opposition is indeed coming in the first months of 2025, both on a large and small scale. 

On a large scale, it is the US National Bank’s withdrawal from the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), as well as Donald Trump’s radical break with the Paris Climate Agreement, the US sustainability investment program Inflation Reduction Act of his predecessor Joe Biden, and his own US Environmental Protection Agency and their safeguarding programs. 

Trump has announced to turn most sustainability programs down without any compromise and to start to drill in environmentally protected areas, as he put it in his inaugural address on January 20, 2025: “We will drill, baby, drill!”

More or less simultaneously on the other side of the Atlantic big pond, it is the European Union’s softening of its announced end of the fossil fuel combustion engine, the declaration of nuclear and gas energy as sustainable energies and the outcry of business associations and enterprises about the declining competitiveness of European companies in international comparison also due to environmental regulations.

Their assertion is that in the neo-conservative to hyper-authoritarian age of Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, almost only Europe and some single countries like Canada are seriously implementing them. 

On a smaller scale, there are increasing protests from local and regional communities against further regulatory steps to protect the environment and a generally noticeable weariness with the words ”sustainability” and “participation”, which, from the point of view of many citizens, have been used too inflationary over the past few years, being imposed by elites through the instruments of political correctness and wokeness.

This procedure, in the views of many, has set an “absolute truth” from above on which no dissent was possible anymore, ultimately limiting personal freedom and harming free choice by implicit and explicit pressure. 

In addition to these phenomena of satiety, there have been most recently technology offensives from the fossil mobility sector, such as the production of more efficient combustion engines, which are expected to compete with electric mobility in a more tied race over the years to come. 

Last but not least, global signature events such as the recent UN Climate Summit COP29 in November 2024 Baku, Azerbaijan, have recently also meant setbacks rather than progress for the global sustainability drive. 

For example, regarding the payment of climate compensation between the Global North and South, the core outcome was that Europe should essentially shoulder this alone because, with a few exceptions, no one else declared themselves ready for binding measures to jointly raise the required US$300 billion.

China and South Korea did not, continuing to declare themselves developing countries and not paying a cent; Russia did not, because it finances its wars from the export of fossil raw materials, on which its internal magnate power system is built; the US did not, because under the Trump 2.0 administration it is focusing more than ever on the extraction of fossil raw materials; and the Arab self-declared “future-oriented states” did not because they also still widely off oil and are less interested in social change than in “leapfrogging” technologies. 

By most of these powers, technology is increasingly seen – rather one-sidedly – as “the” solution regarding future sustainability and planetary protection, and new technologies are thus increasingly positioned in competition or even as a replacement for sustainability. 

The motto in many areas outside Europe and some affiliated nations in 2025 seems to be: We only have to wait until technology no longer causes pollution or even makes everything so clean that it is okay, which will inevitably happen sooner or later due to the inherent laws of auto-evolution of technology. Yet, in the meantime, we don’t have to do without anything and certainly not reduce growth. 

The consequence: growth stabilization or “degrowth” discussions, in essence, currently only exist in Europe, home to only 5-7% of the world’s population, and hardly anywhere else in serious and systemic ways. 

Yet also in the EU, resistance against “strong” sustainability pathways is growing with the politically conservative shift that is taking place in many European countries. Some progressive observers are therefore worriedly asking themselves: Was the sustainability idea perhaps too ambitious for our time? And is it now coming to an end with Donald Trump – or at least experiencing a historical break from which it could take years to recover? 

However, on closer inspection, these fears are due to rather simplistic, linear ideas of development and time – an approach that should actually have been obsolete for a long time. Because we know by now that ideas have risen in history; they then materialized in a certain period up to a certain form and peak, which was always context- and time-dependent.

And sooner or later, after this period, they had to reach a limit, after which they were either relativized, transformed into something else, or indeed displaced or even seemingly destroyed by opposing forces when the pendulum swings to the “other side”, which always did and does in historical cycles.

These cycles, in essence, correspond to those “hermeneutical circles” that modern philosophy describes as creative spirals consisting of the interplay between opposites. 

For some pessimists, within such pendulum movements, ideas appear as a historical phase that only lasts for a while and then disappears to make way for other ideas. In reality, however, the rise and fall of ideas occur in recurring cycles. It is a kind of circular movement of death and rebirth, figuratively speaking.

Many ideas in history that were born out of a high degree of maturity of their time, like sustainability, can have their period in which they have a strong effect. Then they can have to temporarily take a back seat, or even fail indefinitely. 

In the first case, these ideas have to “overwinter,” which they usually do on their own by retreating into niches or below the surface of public debate and prominence. Later, after the overwintering phase, they may return – mostly if they were not superficial but reflected the substance of historical evolution and development. 

This has always been the case with the more profound zeitgeist ideas. Their representatives, for example, artists, often rose to fame and were traded at high prices, only to be forgotten for decades in the following epoch and fall in price – only to be rediscovered in the subsequent era and rise again. 

The most interesting thing about this implicit law of circular decline and resurgence is that ideas disappear or are pushed into the background, but when they come back, they usually have become much stronger than they were, although they often have changed form or phrasing. 

When ideas come back, they usually also last longer and have greater stability than during their original rise. That is, after the overwintering phase, the resurrection phase can make ideas even more influential, although often more differentiated and “wise” than they were in the first place. 

It is exactly for these reasons that history must be considered as something superhuman that is made by humans, which is where its creative paradox lies. Those ideas that are historically “defeated” by superhuman laws of alternation, when they do come back – and nobody knows beforehand if, how and when exactly this occurs – often do so after metamorphoses and are therefore much more difficult to completely defeat again. 

Ideas, one could summarize, basically must go through death and resurrection, like nature in the course of the tides, to reach their destiny. It could be assumed that this is exactly what is happening – or will happen – with the sustainability idea.

The good thing about its temporary trimming could be that its ideological appropriation – the transformation of an idea into an ideology that answers everything and that one is no longer allowed to contradict, which was at least temporarily the case in Europe – is reduced. 

Then the sustainability idea can restore itself more freely and with more participants: namely as the original power of something right that needs no moralization and no ethical formalization to be right because it is felt, sensed and supported by ordinary people with emphasis simply because it makes sense. 

The recent shift in the US towards a – presumably also only temporary – anti-sustainability stance cannot change that fact. And neither can the people who are driving opposition forward, like some currently prominent politicians steering their nations away from the path-breaking sustainability pacts of 2015 (SDGs), 2016 (Paris Agreement) and 2024 (United Nations Pact for the Future). 

In our era, politics is always the balance between the individual moral feeling regarding a righteous livelihood and the collective formalization of a compromise between different ideas about it, a social pact called “democracy.” 

If today there are politicians in the White House – and elsewhere – who continue to underscore at any occasion that they are nothing more than just “dealmakers,” they thereby admit that they have nothing to do with the effort to integrate values with serving the general public, of which democracy consists. 

It is humanly foreseeable that such an attitude against the very substance of politics consciously will be replaced by “pure business logic”, as for example Donald Trump displayed in his now (in)famous public White House conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February 2025, cannot last. 

What does all this mean if we try to sum up the teachings? It means ideas can only apply and work cyclically – even if they are right and historically at the time. If we are convinced that the sustainability idea was and remains right to achieve a better world, we should also come to the conviction that this idea will be resurrected with transformed appearance and strength in the coming years, as history never stops but continues to develop, unfold and ramify. 

All those who believe in sustainability perhaps may not sleep soundly in the Trump-Putin-Xi era, but should remain optimistic in principle. Because what we have seen over the recent years teaches us mainly four things.

First: Developments always consist of cycles and circuits, not of beginnings and ends. 

Second: An idea whose time has come remains right, regardless of ideological appropriations or rejections.

Third: Practical initiatives based on long-termism – such as the “International Decade 2024-35 of Science for Sustainable Development” – will remain in place against all odds, even if they may require constant new supporters and intellectual and solidarity-based infusions of confidence. 

And finally, fourth: Moral courage and intellectual honesty for what is right is needed not so much in easy times, but first and foremost in difficult times: in times of overwintering and metamorphosis. 

Eventually, the deeper feeling of many people today, particularly of young people around the world, should give us courage. Because there is hardly a “normal” person who doubts, in her or his honest feelings and thoughts, that we should not take better care of the planet, pollute it less and lead it into a more “natural” future protecting its unparalleled beauty, value and dignity. 

Who who still feels any connection to her or his living environment in which she or he moves, and to the people who exist in it, would doubt this in the slightest? 

In sum and looking forward, the sustainability idea is and remains right in 2025, and far beyond, because it is both consciously and, perhaps more important, instinctively shared by every person who is still connected in any way with her or his natural environment, her or his body and the destiny of both and thus of us all. 

Roland Benedikter is an internationally renowned political scientist and sociologist with specialization in global development who co-coined the term “reglobalization” since 2019 (see Ephrat Livni in The New York Times). He is co-head of the Center for Advanced Studies of Eurac Research Bolzano, Italy, UNESCO Chair in Interdisciplinary Anticipation and Global-Local Transformation and Full Member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts.

He was a Full Member of the “Circle for the Future” of the Federal German Ministry of Education and Research Berlin advising the German Federal Government 2019-23, has co-authored two US Government White Papers on Advanced Technologies and one Report to the Club of Rome, is the author and editor of more than 30 books and more than 200 publications and on the advisory and editorial board of Harvard International Review, New Global Studies, Global-e and the Brill book series “Global Populisms.”

He teaches at Sapienza University Rome I and previously worked at Stanford, Georgetown and UC at Santa Barbara Universities. In 2024-25, he was a consulting member for the Dubai Global 50 Future Opportunities Report 2025 of the Dubai government.

Continue Reading

The Fed tilts hawkish with latest interest rate projections – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Not that the standard interest rate for federal funds was maintained at a constant level, is what the Federal Reserve’s most essential meeting revealed. That was anticipated.

Otherwise, what emerges from the meeting are indications that Fed politicians are dovish in spite of worries that a crisis may be on the horizon. A continuation of that bend doesn’t look good for interest charges to drop anytime soon. Additionally, it might cause the Fed to fight with the Trump presidency.

The interest-rate forecasts by politicians are the first to indicate the symptoms. In contrast to the 19 Fed governors and bank president who predicted two interest rate reductions in 2025, just 11 of 19 of those predicted in the December of last year’s projections.

These policymakers ‘ projections for inflation are worse than they were in December, with a median of 2.8 %, up from 2.5 % three months ago. Keep in mind that the Fed has consistently urged it to resume rates reduction when it is confident that inflation is nearing its target of 2 %.

Only 11 of the 19 members of the Federal Reserve’s rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee held two interest rate reduces this year at their March meet, along from 15 who did but in December, based on the dot story that was released with their most recent financial projections. Each shaded circle in this illustration represents the value of a particular participant’s judgment ( rounded to the nearest 1 / 8 percentage point ) of the appropriate target range for the federal funds rate or the appropriate target level for the federal funds rate at the end of the specified calendar year or over the longer run. Federal Reserve Board in graphic form

The Fed’s benchmark federal funds rate, which is currently between 4 14 % and 4 12 percent, is projected to decline to even 3.1 % in the long run.

Todd Hultman, a former DTN analyst, stated in September that lowering the fed funds rate to 3 % was essential to easing the farm economy’s strain.

The only thing that could have pushed the Fed to resume lowering rates was the possibility of a recession, given that inflation is so volatile. However, policymakers remain positive about the outlook of the economy despite recent consumer sentiment data that has sparked concerns about the recession in some investors.

They began their post-meeting statement by lowering their GDP growth forecast for 2025 from 2.1 % to 1.7 % while also lowering their GDP growth forecast for 2025.” Recent indicators suggest that economic activity has continued to expand at a steady pace,” they said. In recent months, the unemployment rate has stabilized at a low level, and labor market conditions are still favorable.

Following the Fed’s announcement, the stock market ended. However, at least some Wall Street analysts still believe that bad economic news is on the horizon.

If they’re correct, the Fed will find itself in a difficult position. A weak economy typically results in a decrease in inflation, enabling the Fed to cut rates while remaining faithful to its dual goals of ensuring stable prices and maximum employment.

The Fed would have to choose between battling inflation, which would require leaving rates high or even rising, and boosting the economy, which would mean rate cuts, if the economy actually suffered a significant decline while inflation remained high ( a situation known as stagflation ). The Fed couldn’t possibly have both.

If it decides to combat inflation, it might face a president who favors lower interest rates and believes he should be entitled to his or her vote. It would be important to protect the Fed’s independence.

The Fed’s decision to slow down the unwinding of its$ 6.8 trillion balance sheet appeared to be dovish.

The Fed has allowed the Treasury and even mortgage debt to mature without being replaced at the monthly rate of$ 60 billion, which includes$ 35 billion in mortgage instruments and$ 25 billion in Treasuries. Beginning in April, it will only permit Treasuries worth$ 5 billion to expire without replacement.

The result of the shrinkage is deflationary and will squeeze the reserves commercial banks have to play with. However, the Fed isn’t trying to ease monetary policy by slowing the shrinkage. It is avoiding issues with the overnight lending market that could arise as a result of Congress’s proposed summer increase in the federal debt ceiling.

Governor Christopher Waller was the one person who cast a ballot against the Fed’s most recent actions. His objection to the Fed’s asset holdings decline declined more than the decision to hold rates steady. Despite speculation, Waller is running for president in a bid to replace Jerome Powell, whose term will end in 2019.

Will it be interesting to see if the Fed’s hawkish attitude will hold up the next few months ‘ economic data. Although the stock market’s initial response was positive, many Wall Streeters don’t share the Fed’s optimism about the economy. No one wants a recession, but the Fed’s next wave of forecasts could be very different if we do.

Urban Lehner, a former long-time Asia correspondent and editor for the Wall Street Journal, is DTN/The Progressive Farmer’s editor emeritus.

This article, which was originally published on March 19 by the latter news organization and is now being republished by Asia Times with permission, is titled” Copyright 2025 DTN/The Progressive Farmer.” All trademarks are reserved. Follow  Urban Lehner ; on ; X @urbanize.

Continue Reading

Indonesia to launch new GovTech super app, require bank accounts for social assistance distribution

By:
On:
In: Asia

Every home must have a bank account in order for the proper distribution of social support, according to Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan, president of the National Economic Council. The Indonesian government may create a very application that combines all website services provided by ministries and state agencies.

According to Luhut, president Prabowo Subianto will launch the GovTech ( Government Technology ) super app on August 17 during the nation’s Independence Day celebrations, according to news outlet Jakarta Globe on Wednesday ( Mar 19 ).

After holding a meeting with the president and the monetary ministers at the State Palace in Jakarta, the leader stated that the leader wants to introduce GovTech as a centralized system that will improve efficiency and reduce the possibility of corruption. &nbsp,

The leader will be able to meet with hundreds of young web designers who were key contributors to GovTech, he continued.

According to the president’s first calculations, the digitalization could result in “unnecessary spending” of 100 trillion ringgit ( US$ 6 billion ), Luhut claimed. &nbsp,

Although it was not disclosed in media reports how much the excellent app and online services would charge, Indonesia’s leaders have recently discussed streamlining public services. &nbsp,

Joko Widodo, the then-president, ordered government officials to stop creating new wireless applications in May of last year. Additionally, he spearheaded a project called INA Digital to combine the data and systems of roughly 27, 000 programs used by several regional and ministry administrations.

The GovTech very software does have four major purposes, according to Jakarta Globe. &nbsp,

It will concentrate on maximizing the amount of state revenue collected by streamlining virtual tax payments and ensuring correct royalties collection from the coal and mineral sectors. &nbsp,

By enabling real-time surveillance of state projects and vendor vendor data-driven analysis, it aims to increase the effectiveness of state investing. &nbsp,

The software will centralize crucial public services, including access to education and heath, drivers ‘ licenses, passports, and membership administration. &nbsp,

Additionally, it may make it simpler to distribute federal aid, with money being immediately sent to recipients ‘ bank addresses linked to the GovTech game. &nbsp,

The Online Single Submission System enhancements are intended to enhance the process of obtaining business licenses, as well as the very software. &nbsp,

This may increase Indonesia’s standing in the market and encourage the expansion of small and medium businesses.

Indonesia’s budget, which recorded an early-year deficit in January and February 2025, and the state’s revenues declining by about 20 %, have impacted investors ‘ confidence in the country. &nbsp,

Inquiries remain over additional policy decisions, such as the start of Danantara, a fresh sovereign wealth fund that may regulate the resources of all state-owned entities, including three of Indonesia’s largest businesses.

President Prabowo announced a 256 trillion ringgit ( US$ 15.54 billion ) funds split for ministries and state agencies earlier this year, along with a 50 trillion pound reduction in northern government transfers to provincial governments. The drastic reductions in staff morale resulted in a wide range of effects, including a lack of funds to assist victims of violence.Continue Reading

Danantara: Indonesia’s ticking financial time bomb – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Indonesia has lengthy straddled the line between passion and excess. Although it has a lot of potential, governmental incompetence has previously caused economic crises. &nbsp,

The country is in a collision course with economic unrest thanks to President Prabowo Subianto’s aggressive efforts to establish Danantara, a sovereign wealth fund allegedly built after Singapore’s Temasek.

Alarm bells are ringing as a result of the recent decline of Indonesia’s property industry and the temporary suspension of investing. Who is it really that Danantara’s bell really tannoys? The Indonesia itself is the truth, which is unsettling.

To attract new foreign investment, improve Indonesia’s competitiveness, and propel Indonesia’s transformation into a regional economic powerhouse, Danantara was intended to be Prabowo’s financial masterstroke.

The implementation has been shoddy, but the perspective is great. Danantara is built on a risky redistribution of Indonesia’s federal resources, in contrast to Temasek in Singapore or Khazanah in Malaysia, which both prospered thanks to watchful investment and surplus management. &nbsp,

The government cut funding for essential public services, including a 24 % reduction in funding for elementary education, a 39 % reduction in funding for higher education, a 20 % reduction in funding for healthcare, and crucially, a 73 % reduction in funding for public works and infrastructure projects.

These breaks have not been viewed as proper in an market that is already struggling with global challenges. Instead, they have stifled public opinion, created worries about the economy, and sparked a worried investment flight.

Trust is a key ingredient for markets to live. Capital flight begins the time investors begin to doubt a government’s ability to manage its market properly. That is exactly what is taking place in Jakarta.

In intraday trading on Tuesday, the Jakarta Composite Index (JCI) dropped 7.1 % and dropped nearly 4 %, reaching its lowest level in four years. Trading was suspended, an unprecedented step not seen since the Covid-19 pandemic’s financial panic. &nbsp,

The ringgit depreciated by 2 % against the US dollars at the same time, indicating growing concerns about capital flows. For foreign investors, Danantara, which was once viewed as a bold move, now appears to be a ringing economic time bomb.

Prabowo’s nationalist spending plan is at the heart of Indonesia’s growing financial instability. His administration has promised optimistic cultural initiatives, including a US$ 28 billion complimentary meal initiative for students. &nbsp,

Although heroic in intent, Danantara’s enormous fiscal demands have combined to create what is being viewed as an untenable fiscal burden. &nbsp,

Indonesia has long taken pride in keeping its budget deficit below 3 % of GDP. Financial analysts and investors are unsure of the government’s plan to keep the deficit at 2.53 %, despite the government’s assurances. &nbsp,

The statistics stop adding up when a government cuts crucial solutions while increasing politically motivated investing. Prabowo’s state, however, continues to be dejected, doubling down on its fiscal approach rather than changing its program.

No accountability, no accountability.

Danantara’s lack of accountability and accountability is one of its biggest problems. In contrast to Temasek and Khazanah, which have independent boards and strict monitoring, Danantara is under the direct command of Prabowo. &nbsp,

Investors have been frightened by this structure because they fear the bank may turn into a conduit for democratic favoritism rather than a clear-eyed economic stimulus. Worse, Indonesia’s regional accountants have been exempt from Danantara’s monitoring, raising concerns that trillions could be manipulated or worse. &nbsp,

It takes a while for cracks to start appearing when the base of an economic establishment is built on privacy rather than confidence. The rupiah is also becoming more prone to physical shocks as the money leaves Indonesia. A weakening currency results in higher import costs, rising prices, and more challenging customer service.

Indonesia may experience a full-scale dollar issue, which is eerily similar to the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis, when the ringgit collapsed, prices skyrocketed, and the nation was finally forced into an IMF loan.

The change between today and today is that Indonesia’s bankers are stronger and its economy is more developed. No economy, however resilient, can tolerate irresponsible macroeconomic policies and investment stress continuously.

Leading academics and academics have expressed their reservations about Prabowo’s financial strategies.

Former Indian finance minister Dr. Chatib Basri, a respected economist and former head of the country, has argued that fundamental changes are necessary to meet Indonesia’s very ambitious 8 % GDP growth target given limited fiscal space and large market interest rates for government securities. &nbsp,

Additionally, analysts have observed similarities between Danantara and other sovereign wealth funds, warning that Indonesia runs the risk of developing an organization that may turn into a liability rather than an advantage without proper management. &nbsp,

Sri Mulyani Indrawati, the country’s foremost advocate of macroeconomic prudence, is in direct opposition to Prabowo’s wide plans. &nbsp,

The government’s spending plans are straining the nation’s money, despite her efforts to keep the deficit under 3 % of GDP. Investors have been further alarmed by speculation about her probable departure.

Running out of time

Is it possible that Indonesia is quickly running out of time? His government may be wise to take four immediate actions if Prabowo wants to prevent a financial disaster.

Firstly, regain buyer trust. Jokowi should immediately assure the markets that Danantara is under separate control. That would require allowing federal auditors to review the firm’s management and prepare a report on their findings as soon as possible.

Second, balance the finances. That would require redistributing resources to necessary services like infrastructure, care, and education. &nbsp,

Cutting these industries to finance Danantara has been a strategic error that has probably weakened cultural foundations and sparked economic anxiety. With an impoverished labor and crumbling public services, a government cannot create long-term prosperity.

Third, improve management and accountability. The state needs to change its management structure to make Danantara operate more similarly to Temasek in Singapore or Government Pension Fund Global in Norway. e.g., it is not a vehicle for social favoritism as an establishment run by professionals. Without accountability, owners will continue to flee. &nbsp,

Lastly, Prabowo must maintain the rupeah in addition to the methods listed above. A weakening dirhams could lead to a full-fledged currency crisis for Indonesia. &nbsp,

In order to reduce inflationary forces while restoring business confidence in the security of the rupee, the government may work with Bank Indonesia to arrange with them.

Indonesia also has a chance to make a course correction before it is too later. However, the screen is rapidly closing.

If Prabowo goes down his present risky course of putting short-term political objectives before long-term financial stability, he runs the risk of ruining two decades of progress in creating a solid, investor-friendly Indonesia and, in the process, destroying the middle class.

Continue Reading

Debt plan spooks pundits

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

According to experts, Thaksin’s theory” had fail.”

Thaksin Shinawatra meets supporters in Phitsanulok province on Monday. (Screenshot)
On Monday, Thaksin Shinawatra meets with followers in Phitsanulok state. ( Screenshot )

Academics warned the government on Wednesday about implementing former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s plan to address family bill, warning that it might not solve the problem and have a negative effect.

They expressed caution against Thaksin’s government-led house debt buy-back program, which they acknowledged was possible but that if implemented alone, it might be a double-edged sword.

The government had organize under the initiative to arrange for individuals to pay off their debt to the bank system slowly.

The government had then assist people in rebuilding their life by removing their names from the National Credit Bureau (NCB), releasing them from bill, and allowing them to begin clean.

This action could get financed through private investment, as opposed to purely state funds, Thaksin claims.

Given the amount of household debt in Thailand, AMCs ‘ Associate Professor Wichai Witayakiattilerd, a professor at Thammasat University’s Department of Mathematics and Statistics, said allowing AMCs to obtain bad debts from financial institutions as opposed to using state money would be a more suitable strategy given the amount of home loan.

The nation’s household debt currently totals 15.54 trillion baht, with non-performing loans ( NPLs ) accounting for 4 %, or about 620 billion baht, according to the academic.

He predicted that an AMC could inject between 120 and 210 billion baht into the system, increase GDP by 1.5 days, and at least reduce bad debt by at least 50 % if it purchased bad debt at an average reduction of 35 %, which he termed a typical market mechanism.

He suggested that the system may be restricted to low-income people with debts under 500, 000 baht as opposed to being a blanket policy. He did point out that if consumers didn’t adopt better control and change their financial habits, the program would have risks.

Nonarit Bisonyabut, a senior research fellow at the Thailand Development Research Institute ( TDRI), said he disagrees with the proposal because it would only provide temporary relief rather than address the root cause.

He claimed that people are hoarding cash and that the present situation is due to rising loan, which makes lenders more cautious about lending. This limits the flow of money, and it has an impact on overall financial activity.

The request may provide a quick solution for home loan reduction right away. It fails to target the deeper structural issues, he claimed.

According to Mr. Nonarit, the problem may fix itself if the financial system makes the necessary changes.

The Bank of Thailand ( BoT ) stated on Wednesday that it is awaiting clarification on the policy.

The central banks said it focuses on promoting audio fiscal discipline to avoid moral hazard, and ensuring debtors you access upcoming credit at reasonable prices in order to address household debt.

Options require collaboration from different sectors, it said, given the complexity of Thailand’s home debt.

Sirikanya Tansakul, a member of the People’s Party ( PP ) in the party, expressed doubts about the effectiveness of Thaksin’s proposal because the bulk of the debt is in the informal sector, and commercial banks stand to gain the most.

She claimed that the government does intervene and that debtors might postpone making payments.

She even questioned whether an AMC has the resources to pay off the debt if the state doesn’t have enough money.

” I’m not sure what strategy will be employed to assist the individuals. The internet might want to ask Thaksin afterwards.

Continue Reading