60 Times OF PERSONALITY This time, Singapore and Thailand honor their 60 years of political relations, according to MTI. The STEER governmental conference was co-chaired by both ministers on Friday in Singapore. They praised partnerships between Singapore and Thailand firms and reiterated long-standing diplomatic financial assistance. MTI reported that theContinue Reading
The United States is working hard to stifle its position in the world market under President Donald Trump. But in the rest of the world, globalization is still proceeding steadily.
When you said “globalization” in the 2000s and the early 2010s, it was frequently simply meant “moving manufacturing to China,” but that’s now pretty much over. Inbound foreign direct investment has dropped off a cliff, and businesses are now trying to pull their cash out. Blame a combination of rising labour costs, the closing off of the Chinese domestic market, and “de-risking” over fears of battle.
However, this doesn’t think China will just shut itself off from the rest of the world and vanish. Far from it. China will change from being a , destination , for strong funding to being a , source , of funding. A whole bunch of Chinese companies are going to build factories ( and offices ) in other countries.
In reality, this is already taking place in a significant manner. Kyle Chan ( whose website I highly recommend, by the way ) has a really excellent article about this trend.
He states:
Chinese firms are racing to develop companies around the world and build new global supply chains, driven by a desire to avoid taxes and safe access to marketplaces.
Chinese businesses have been setting up factories in big target markets like the EU and Brazil. And they’ve been building flowers in” cable countries” like Mexico and Vietnam that offer access to developed industry through trade agreements.  ,
Morocco, for instance, has emerged as a surprisingly common destination…due to its trade agreements with both the US and the EU…Countries across the developed world and the Global South everywhere are keen for Chinese firms to build businesses in their industry, with the promise of new tasks and new technologies.
Kyle’s excellent map demonstrates how global this boom in investment is:
This boom in overall numbers may seem a little unintuitive. As Rhodium Group reports, a large portion of China’s official , completed , outbound investment is actually “phantom FDI” — Chinese companies keeping their earnings outside of China by pretending to do FDI. And when you look at FDI  and announcements, the total is still significantly below what it was in the middle of 2010:
However, this overall decline obscures a significant shift in how much FDI China is doing, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Up until the pandemic, China’s foreign investment was focused more on acquiring foreign companies, usually in developed countries — basically, Chinese companies bought American/European/Japanese/Korean companies so that they could A) get their technology, and B) use them as local beachheads to sell stuff to rich consumers. The mid-2010s saw a significant boom.
Since 2022, however, China’s focus has shifted dramatically to “greenfield” investment — Chinese companies are building their own offices and factories overseas:
The auto and energy sectors account for the majority of this new wave of greenfield FDI:
Basically, the Chinese auto and battery industries are going global. In addition to his post, Kyle has written in a fantastic thread about the plans to expand BYD, China’s flagship automaker, and its most notable business.
Greenfield FDI is in many ways more of a boon to the receiving country than M&, A, when you build new factories and offices in a country, it creates new jobs, and often transfers new technologies, instead of just changing the ownership of an existing business. And unlike M&, A, greenfield FDA frequently targets developing nations because it’s typically at least partially concerned with lowering costs.
So it makes sense for developing countries around the world to be a lot more excited about the flood of Chinese investment now than back in 2016. Additionally, we should anticipate that this wave will be more resilient than the previous one because it is driven by Chinese costs and by mature Chinese businesses with long-term interests in foreign markets.
Generally speaking,  , this is how economic development is supposed to work. As economies become more expensive, countries are forced to shift production to less expensive locations. China was the cheap place to make stuff 20 years ago, now, it’s places like Vietnam, Indonesia and Morocco. Manufacturing companies frequently fly from one country to another, helping each one to become industrialized along the way like a flock of geese.
Also, it’s easier to sell products in a country if you also produce those things inside that country — transport costs are lower, you can get a better understanding of the local market, and you can more quickly respond to local changes in demand, policy, and so on. Additionally, there are currently a number of tariffs to take into account; if those products are made in Europe, they will be much friendlier to Chinese companies.
So we should generally view China’s outbound investment boom as a great thing for the world. It is assisting in industrializing developing nations like Morocco and Indonesia, as well as diversifying and modernizing the economies of middle-income nations like Brazil, Turkey, Mexico, and Thailand. Chinese-led globalization is looking like a positive alternative to America’s bizarre, ideologically-motivated retreat from the world economy.
However, there are indications that China will no longer be as welcoming and helpful as it was in the 1990s and 2000s. Kyle reports that China is trying to isolate the world’s biggest and most important developing country from its new economic world order:
Beijing is trying to influence the Chinese industry’s global expansion, including which nations they invest in and how. Beijing is encouraging Chinese companies to build plants in “friendly” countries while discouraging them from investing in others in a kind of “industrial diplomacy” .…India represents the most striking case of Beijing’s effort to shape the international behavior of Chinese firms …]A ] cross a number of industries, Beijing seems to be discouraging Chinese firms making future plans to invest in India while also limiting the flow of workers and equipment …
Beijing appears to be restricting the flow of Chinese equipment and workers to India, which would otherwise restrict Apple’s manufacturing partner Foxconn from . Some of Foxconn’s Chinese workers in India were even told to return to China. This informal Chinese ban covers businesses that work in India, as well as other electronics manufacturers. Beijing has warned Chinese automakers to avoid investing in India.
Why is China doing this? According to Kyle, one possible cause is geopolitical spite, and China appears to be restricting investment into the Philippines, which it has a territorial dispute with. China also has a border dispute with India. And to be fair, not all of the chit is from China; some Chinese leaders have also blocked Chinese investments.
But it’s fairly obvious there’s something more strategic going on here — China doesn’t want to build up the manufacturing capabilities of its biggest potential rival.
India is now the most populous nation in the world, having overtaken China a few years ago. Its GDP is growing faster — it grew 6.5 % in 2024 and 9.2 % in 2023, significantly faster than China. And as the Wall Street Journal reported back in 2023, it’s been making a push to become a global manufacturing hub, much like China did in the 2000s:
Western companies are desperately looking for a backup to China as the world’s factory floor, a strategy widely termed” China plus one” .…India is making a concerted push to be the plus one…Only India has a labor force and an internal market comparable in size to China ‘s…Western governments see democratic India as a natural partner, and the Indian government has pushed to make the business environment more friendly than in the past …] India ] scored a coup with the decision by , Apple , to significantly , expand iPhone production in India, including , expediting the manufacturing , of its most advanced model …
After decades of disappointment, [ India ] is making progress. Its manufactured exports were barely a tenth of China’s in 2021, but they exceeded all other emerging markets except Mexico’s and Vietnam ‘s…The biggest gains have been in electronics, where exports have tripled since 2018 to$ 23 billion… India has gone from making 9 % of the world’s smartphone handsets in 2016 to a projected 19 % this year…
Foreign direct investment into India increased by$ 42 billion annually between 2020 and 2022, which is doubling in less than a decade.
India’s electronics sector has  , especially taken off, helped by specific government incentives and by Apple’s decision to locate much of its production in the country.
India’s manufacturing sector is still hindered by some poorly designed policies, particularly those that impose tariffs on imported components, which make it difficult for India to carry out the kind of assembly work that helped China expand in the 2000s.
But the country’s infrastructure has improved by leaps and bounds, and the government has made some progress in reducing red tape. The government should increase that momentum by easing the burdensome regulations even further, promoting education and labor mobility, and shifting from protectionism to export promotion.
But the most important reason companies want to make things in India isn’t low labor costs — it’s the lure of the company’s domestic market. Establishing factories in India means opening a door to 1.5 billion people with rapid income growth.
Remember,  , scale matters in manufacturing. The lower your costs go, the more units you can ship, and the more competitive you become. It’s going to be a while before Indians can all afford the latest and best electronics and cars and appliances, but soon they’ll be able to afford unbelievably huge numbers of the pretty-good stuff. Any business that capitalizes on that demand won’t just generate tons of revenue; it’ll also lower its costs.
And unlike China, India probably won’t force out multinational companies once it has  , strip-mined them , for their technological secrets. India offers a unique opportunity to expand its market that China has never had. Of , course,  , companies want to put their factories there, just as soon as government policy makes it feasible to do so.
At first, multinational corporations will export their best technology to India, focusing solely on low-quality assembly work. But as Indian manufacturers master those simple tasks, they will start to climb the value chain, learning how to do more complex processes and make higher-value goods. When that happens, multinational companies will have a better sense of why they should invest in higher-tech projects in India.
Eventually the Indian companies themselves will get so good that they’ll be able to create their own brands, start doing R&, D for themselves, and compete on the global stage, using the advantages of scale that they get from knowing their home market better than anyone else.
This implies that multinational corporations are naturally inclined to train their future rivals. Nowhere was this effect more powerful than in China, where European, American, Japanese and Korean companies offshored production to China in the 1990s and 2000s, then found themselves competing with Chinese companies in the 2010s. Many Americans now consider that allowing this to happen was a grave tactical error.
China’s leaders probably concur with that assessment, and are determined not to make a similar error with respect to India. To take advantage of India’s cheaper labor and sizable domestic market, it would be less expensive for BYD, CATL, or Chinese electronics companies to relocate their factories to India.
But in the long run, that could risk speeding up the technological development of Indian rivals to Chinese manufacturers, as well as making India itself rich enough to challenge China on the world stage.
People in China are, undoubtedly, considering this possibility. In , a great article , back in 2023, Viola Zhou and Nilesh Christopher wrote about how Chinese engineers working at plants in India felt like they were training their own replacements:
Chinese engineers occasionally discussed how they were working to make their own jobs obsolete, according to Li. One day, Indians might become so adept at creating iPhones that Apple and other global brands could not operate without Chinese workers.
Three managers said some Chinese employees aren’t willing teachers because they see their Indian colleagues as competition. However, Li asserted that progress was unavoidable. ” If we didn’t come here, someone else would”, he said. This is the turning point of history. No one will be able to stop it”.
This was undoubtedly the experience of Korean and German engineers working in China in 2007 or 2012
But it’s not just that Indian , companies , might one day compete with Chinese ones. India and China will be the most powerful in a world where economic development is largely evenly distributed because they have by far the largest populations in the world.
So if China wants to stay much more powerful than India, it has an incentive to make sure that economic development is not evenly distributed — that the new wave of globalization skips India entirely.
China’s leaders are likely to envision a new global economy with lower-quality assembly jobs in other nations, low-income manufacturing, and a service-dependent backwater like India.
India, of course, doesn’t want this, and it has some powerful natural allies. Other highly developed nations, such as Germany, Japan, Korea, France, and others, want to stop China from establishing a future in which they will dominate the world. The best way to do that is to invest in India.
Of course, the US ought to be India’s most significant and valuable ally in this conflict. A rational and reasonable US would be trying to encourage as much investment as possible in India, and to boost India’s technological capabilities and income level as fast as possible.
However, the days of the US acting rationally and justly are over, at least for the moment. America has retreated from the world, engaged in internal struggles, and shattered by its own bizarre ideology.
So India needs to focus on partnering with the world’s other developed countries — with Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Canada and the nations of Europe. It needs to maintain cordial and friendly relations with these nations, ratify free trade agreements, lower or eliminate tariffs on imported goods, expand business-friendly policies, encourage more inbound FDI, and generally integrate itself into a global bloc that includes every wealthy nation that opposes China’s rule over the world economy.
The withdrawal of the US will create headaches for India, as will China’s determination to keep Indian manufacturing down. However, India still has a lot of places where it can invest in technology and technology. And in the long run, its natural advantages will allow it to industrialize and grow rich, regardless of the forces arrayed against it.
This article was originally published on Noah Smith’s Noahpinion , Substack, and it is now republished with kind permission. Become a Noahopinion , subscriber , here.
China ’s National People’s Congress extravaganza was a fine news-bad news event for international buyers.
Great, in that Xi Jinping’s Communist Party reassured the finance world that China plans to get very micro to mend its micro problems. Poor, in that Xi’s crew really needs to deliver on its plan commitments, lest China loses yet more reliability with international investors.
On the inside, the NPC prioritized reinvigorating personal businesses, level playing fields and shrinking the part of state enterprises for growth and employment. It also vowed to move past the governmental reprisals, including on technology, that originally sent buyers for the exits.
Team Xi sent a “message to entrepreneurs, but also to local governments and regulators, that the private sector ’s important and it ’s necessary, ” says economist Neil Thomas at the Asia Society Policy Institute.
More cheerful announcement came on Friday when finance, banking, central banks and other officials announced they plan to hold a March 17 press conference to describe measures to improve consumption, a signal that sent the CSI 300 Index to its highest level so far this year.
That’s the sub. On the mega, Xi’s government has often proved more skilled at talking the talk than walking the walk on the type of architectural changes many investors crave. Very often, Xi’s reform staff has overpromised and underdelivered.
Premier Li Qiang detailed the government’s fresh policy priorities in the group ’s monthly work record. Li said the latest Enemy “underscores our commitment to meet challenges head-on and wish hard to deliver. ”
Those difficulties include Donald Trump’s escalating trade war, which is imperiling China ’s ability to export its way to 5 % GDP growth, the NPC’s stated target for 2025. So far, Trump has imposed 20 % tariffs on Chinese products; he threatened to hit a 60 % cover charge while on the campaign trail.
Adding more industrial capacity to increase exports will likely experience diminishing returns as developing nations — especially Global South nations — began throwing up their own tariffs and trade barriers on cheap Chinese goods.
“The more intense the trade war, the more aggressively Beijing will add stimulus, ” says Thomas at Asia Society. “Nonetheless, debt concerns will likely deter a stimulus ‘bazooka, ’ and direct consumer stimulus remains unlikely due to ideological opposition and implementation hurdles. ”
One new measure is an expanded US$ 41 billion trade-in program for consumers and businesses involving autos, household appliances and business equipment. China will also roll out additional subsidies for new smartphones, home renovations and healthcare costs.
Beijing plans to issue an additional 4. 4 trillion yuan in local government special-purpose bonds. The debt will finance new infrastructure, purchases of land and unsold housing, and bring government contractors up to date on overdue payments.
Officials also will issue 1. 3 trillion yuan worth of ultralong special treasury bonds to support national security projects and 500 billion yuan in special sovereign bonds to recapitalize state-owned banks.
“It’s unclear how much of a jolt this budget will provide to underlying domestic demand and reflation efforts, despite the sizable rise in the deficit, ” says Jeremy Zook, top China analyst for Fitch Ratings.
China, Li said, will “move faster ” to stimulate domestic demand, policies and measures that may be more clearly articulated at the anticipated March 17 press conference. Significantly, Li said the government plans to make domestic demand the “main engine ” of growth.
If so, that will mean tackling near-record youth unemployment, shortfalls in social benefits and welfare, extreme market volatility, a property sector in crisis and households that reflexively save much more than they spend.
Herein lies the rub, though. China must drastically pick up the pace of reform just as Trump’s tariffs begin to slam global growth prospects. Weathering the storm will require bold steps to increase competitiveness and support the nation’s fast-rising tech sector.
As Morgan Stanley economist Robin Xing notes, China ’s “policy focus is to accelerate AI adoption and autonomous driving, while making gradual progress in restructuring housing and [local government financing vehicle ] debt. ”
Yet, it remains to be seen how quickly AI might boost total factor productivity and overall competitiveness. Until then, Xi can hope his 1. 4 billion people snap to attention and start spending despite the persistent lack of social safety nets to boost household confidence.
“The daily problems facing China ’s citizenry have become severe enough that the government was forced to acknowledge them before the NPC, ” says economist Jeremy Mark at the Atlantic Council. It’s “no small admission for a communist party whose propagandists normally offer a steady diet of hubris. ”
Mack says that Li’s reference to “weak public expectations” in his work report and the decision to spotlight the importance of consumption, “were a bow to public opinion in a country where the public normally has no way of expressing itself. ”
However, Mack adds, “Xi clearly remains deeply committed to his core economic policies — a point underlined on the eve of the NPC with the publication of a speech he delivered in December. While also acknowledging ‘consumption shortcomings, ’ he made clear that the highest priority must remain more world-class enterprises and leading technologies. ”
Xi’s speech, Mack adds, “also insisted that the government’s response to China ’s economic problems had already ‘boosted the property market, stock market, market expectations, and social confidence, ’ suggesting that China ’s paramount leader is skeptical about opening the taps too much for those struggling to make ends meet. ”
This buttresses the argument that Xi is prioritizing structural upgrades over tossing money at China ’s problems.
Carlos Casanova, senior Asia economist at Union Bancaire Privee, says that achieving the 5 % growth target for 2025 presents significant challenges. Beijing acknowledges that the previous year’s target was met thanks to outsized stimulus policy actions agreed by the Politburo on September 26.
“Absent this policy pivot, growth would have been slower, ” Casanova says. “Moreover, exports accounted for one-third of GDP growth in 2024, following a rebound ahead of expected US tariffs in the fourth quarter. Without similar drivers, the government will need to focus on enhancing domestic demand to address the growth gap. ”
To Casanova’s mind, the announcements made during the NPC “did n’t provide enough visibility on this front. ” Nor did Xi and Li offer a credible path out of the deflationary rut into which China threatens to fall.
Despite Beijing’s fiscal support efforts, says Capital Economics analyst Julian Evans-Pritchard, “the degree of easing is more modest than it might appear. ”
As such, he adds, “we remain skeptical that it will be sufficient to prevent growth from slowing this year, especially given the headwinds on the external front and the lack of a more pronounced shift in government spending towards support consumption. ”
The hope, though, is that Xi’s party steps up efforts to make good on the pledges he made last November. That’s when he told a ballroom full of top CEOs that China is again open for business – and ready to work with the US. “China is willing to be a partner and friend of the United States, ” Xi told an audience that included Apple CEO Tim Cook and Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
“If we regard each other as the biggest rival, the most significant geopolitical challenge and an ever-pressing threat, it will inevitably lead to wrong policies, wrong actions and wrong results, ” Xi said. He added that “no matter how the global landscape evolves, the historical trend of peaceful coexistence between China and the United States will not change. ”
Two months later in Davos, Li said “choosing investment in the Chinese market is not a risk, but an opportunity. ” Li stressed that “investing in China will bring huge returns and a better future ” and described the CEOs on hand as “participants, witnesses and beneficiaries of China ’s reform and opening up. ”
China, Li added, “stands ready to seriously look into and solve the difficulties and problems encountered by foreign enterprises ” operating in the country. “We will take active steps to address reasonable concerns of the global business community, ” Li said.
In the years since the market chaos of 2015, China opened equity markets ever wider to overseas investors, steadily increasing quotas for foreign funds. Beijing did the same with government bonds, which have since been added to benchmarks like FTSE-Russell.
Yet access to exchanges in Shanghai and Shenzhen often outpaces reforms needed to prepare China Inc for global prime time. Those include increasing transparency, boosting corporate governance building reliable surveillance mechanisms like trusted, not co-opted, credit rating companies.
To be sure, China has often succeeded by using its own playbook. Back in 1997-98, when developing Asia crashed, China opted against devaluing the yuan. Several times since the late 1990s, traders and analysts have predicted a credit-and-debt-fueled crash. Speculators pounced. Each time, China confounded the naysayers.
Whether China can beat the odds again depends on Xi’s ability to earn investors ’ trust. As the Chinese stock rout that erased over$ 1 trillion in valuation reminded in recent years, there are certain laws of gravity that still apply to economies transitioning from state-driven and export-led growth to services, innovation and domestic consumption.
It’s great that Xi and Li say they’re doubling down on moves to build a more stable economic system. But investors will require more than talk to bet big on China ’s trajectory in 2025.
Follow William Pesek on X at @WilliamPesek
The rapid development of information centres in Malaysia reflects the country’s motivation to become a vital modern hub in Asia Pacific. Driven by increasing demand for cloud computing, artificial intelligence ( AI), and digital services, Malaysia has emerged as an attractive destination for data centre investments due to its strategic location, robust infrastructure, and government incentives.
Main technology firms and hyperscale companies are expanding their existence, fuelling major growth in data center capacity. However, this growth brings pressing issues, including high energy and water use, network security, and sustainability problems.
At the current Siemens Data Centre Conference 2025, two panels of respectable industry leaders discussed how, as the industry evolves, Malaysia may balance economic opportunity with concerned resource management to ensure long-term online resilience.
Digital gateway interests demand tactical planning &, execution, many aspects to be managed
Malaysia is committed to becoming a local online hub for Asean and the Asia Pacific. Nevertheless, achieving this vision demands proper planning and execution, as many factors may be properly managed.
For a start, information areas require large amounts of water for cooling, whereby an average100 watt ( MW) service consumes about 1.5 billion gallons annually- equivalent to 600 Olympic-sized lakes. By 2027, projected capacity growth to 2.2 gigawatt ( GW ) could demand 35 billion litres, said Tindaro Danze, President &, CEO, Siemens Malaysia.
Energy usage is another major problem, as a 100 MW data center uses as little power as 45, 000 families. By 2027, a 2.2 GW power may require power equal to 1.2 million families, nearly the entire populace of Singapore.
Now reliant on fossil fuels, data centres has transition to renewable energy, said Danze yet the network infrastructure may not be equipped to handle this shift, he cautioned, making online solutions necessary for optimising energy distribution and managing grid loads.
Moving forward, Danze said discussions must address water and energy efficiency, carbon footprint, and regulatory challenges. He added that simply constructing data centres is insufficient- Malaysia must ensure these contribute to a thriving digital economy. A coordinated effort among stakeholders is needed to establish Malaysia as a meaningful technology hub while balancing sustainability and economic impact.  ,
Digital minister Gobind Singh ,
Malaysia is rapidly positioning itself as a key digital hub within Asean, recognising the critical role of data centres in shaping its digital economy, said Gobind.
” With a target to increase the digital economy’s contribution to national GDP from 23 % to 25.5 % by the end of the year, the government is committed to fostering an environment that supports both technological growth and sustainability. Given Asean’s population of 700 million, digital infrastructure and AI will be essential in driving regional success”, he said.
To support this transformation, the government is actively shaping policies and governance frameworks that ensure Malaysia remains competitive and adaptable to technological shifts.
” This includes recently introduced data centre planning guidelines that streamline approvals while balancing industrial expansion with community well-being. Thoughtful site planning and zoning regulations are being put in place to mitigate disruptions, ensuring that development aligns with national priorities”, Gobind shared.
However, he acknowledged that the rapid growth of data centres also brings challenges, particularly in resource consumption. These facilities require significant amounts of power and water, prompting the government to prioritise sustainability. Gobind pointed out that measures such as the Green Lane Pathway and upcoming guidelines on power and water efficiency- expected in 2025- reflect a commitment to responsible growth. Expanding Malaysia’s renewable energy capacity and streamlining approval processes for sustainable projects are central to this strategy.
Equally important is talent development. As Malaysia builds its digital infrastructure, bridging skill gaps remains a priority. Collaboration with industry players is key to equipping the workforce with expertise. ” The launch of the National AI Office ( NAIO ) last December further underscores Malaysia’s ambition to lead in AI, ensuring the country has the right ecosystem to drive innovation, attract investment, and support key sectors like healthcare and urban planning”, said Gobind.
With 17 new data centres expected in Selangor alone, strategic planning will be crucial to balancing expansion with sustainability. Gobind emphasised that as discussions on digital infrastructure continue, collaboration between government, industry, and experts will be vital in ensuring Malaysia remains at the forefront of the digital revolution.
The session continued with two panel discussions.
Malaysia’s readiness to be a DC hub in Asia Pacific
With panellists consisting of Ir Megat Jalaluddin, President &, CEO, Tenaga Nasional Bhd, Anuar Fariz Fadzil, CEO, Malaysia Digital Economy Corp, Praba Thiagarajah, Group Executive Chairperson, Basis Bay Group and Charles Santiago, Chairperson, National Water Commission ( SPAN), the discussion, moderated by Hazril Haniff, Vice-President &, Head of Grid Software, Siemens Malaysia touched on various aspects of Malaysia’s lure as a data centre hub including the need to address gaps in policy clarity and another issue that has surfaced with urgency since last year- the role of reclaimed water in the data centre surge.
The rising global demand for AI, e-commerce, Internet of Things ( IoT), and cloud computing is fuelling the rapid growth of the data centre industry. Malaysia is well-positioned to become a regional hub due to its strong ecosystem, which includes key factors essential for data centre operations. These factors include a reliable power supply, water-based cooling infrastructure, sufficient land availability for construction, robust connectivity, and comprehensive security measures encompassing both physical and cybersecurity.
Additionally, Malaysia’s pro-business policies make it an attractive destination for investment, leading to increasing interest from major global players looking to establish data centres in the country.
While Praba acknowledged that Malaysia has strong potential as a data centre hub, he strongly stressed that it must address gaps in policy clarity. Policymakers must act swiftly to establish foundational regulations, as setting up basic policies is an easy yet critical step that can accelerate progress.
Other countries, such as China and Vietnam, have already implemented clear standards, Praba said, leaving Malaysia at risk of falling behind. Regulatory frameworks should be in place before the industry fully matures, not after. Therefore, key ministers and policymakers are urged to prioritise swift policy implementation to ensure Malaysia remains competitive in the global digital economy.
Sharing Praba’s call for urgent action but in terms of water usage, Charles stressed that reclaimed water must be a priority in the 13th Malaysian Plan, particularly for data centres and wafer fabrication. ” Countries like India have already implemented clear policies requiring industrial use of reclaimed water, starting at 50 % and scaling to 100 %. Malaysia must follow suit to ensure sustainable water management for its growing digital infrastructure”, he said.
Charles highlighted that to achieve sustainable planning, data centres must incorporate reclaimed water and rainwater harvesting from the outset. Current developments rely too heavily on potable water, an unsustainable practice. Developers and policymakers must shift toward alternative water-sourcing strategies before construction begins to safeguard Malaysia’s water resources.
In 2024, Selangor approved 27 new data centres, requiring 79 megalitres per day ( MLD ) of water, while Johor approved 17, demanding 59 MLD. Hyperscale data centres consume disproportionately high amounts of water, with some using the equivalent of seven to eight Olympic-sized swimming pools daily.  ,
According to Charles, alarmingly, some approved hyperscale centres lack direct water sources, highlighting the urgent need for strategic approval limits and water planning.
” Approval processes for data centres must be stricter and proactive, integrating reclaimed water solutions and rainwater harvesting at the design stage rather than as an afterthought”, he urged. The government must enforce clear guidelines on the number and locations of hyperscale centres, considering increasing water demand from population growth, new industries, and wafer fabrication.
Winning and sustaining business in the digital industry
The second panel of the conference comprised of, Adilah Junid, Director of Legal And Government Affairs, Microsoft Malaysia, Cheam Tat Inn, Managing Director, Equinix Malaysia, Darryll Sinnappa, Country Head, ST Telemedia Global Data Centres (STT GDC ), and Reiner Cham, Sales Manager, Smart Infrastructure- Electrical &, Automation ( EA ), Siemens Malaysia with Karamjit Singh, CEO, Digital News Asia as moderator.
According to Adilah Junid, Malaysia’s data centre growth is supported by policies covering land and water management, as well as data security regulations that establish the country as a trusted hub.  ,
” These policies provide a competitive edge by ensuring data sovereignty and intellectual property protection, attracting global businesses seeking a secure and well-regulated environment”, she explained.
Cheam Tat Inn highlighted that AI is driving a transformation in data centres, increasing the demand for computing power, storage, and network capacity. ” AI-ready data centres must be purpose-built, scalable, and sustainable to meet these growing requirements”, he noted.
Cheam also observed that cloud strategies are evolving, with businesses shifting from exclusive public cloud reliance to hybrid models. ” Cloud rebalancing is where enterprises or customers want to have the right to move part of their infrastructure to on-premises or to colocation data centers, because they now realize that they want to have the freedom of running different critical business workloads across different clouds”, he said.  ,
A colocation data center is a facility in which a business can rent space for servers, storage devices and other computing hardware. This shift is driven by factors such as escalating cloud costs, security concerns, unmet expectations, vendor lock-in fears, and increased compute power needs.
Cheam further explained that a new AI deployment model is emerging, shifting from moving data to the cloud for processing to bringing AI models directly to the data. ” You have the ability to move your data quickly and then seamlessly across different clouds, your control over data sovereignty, your control over any data regulation, while at the same time exploiting the full potential of AI deployments”, he said.  ,
This approach enhances regulatory compliance, accelerates AI operations across geographies, and strengthens security for industries with strict data governance requirements.
Adilah Junid noted that as AI and digital services evolve, customer expectations are becoming more sophisticated. ” Users demand resiliency, scalability, availability, and security while maintaining control over workloads, including the ability to isolate certain processes from others”, she emphasized.  ,
In the digital economy, AI, security, and trust are top priorities, and adoption must extend beyond large enterprises to benefit SMEs and the broader economy.
The rapid evolution of AI from 2022 to 2023 has significantly reshaped business and infrastructure needs. Companies must continuously innovate to remain competitive, yet many businesses are still in the early stages of AI adoption, requiring education and support to navigate this shift effectively.
Conclusion
Sustainability has emerged as a key demand from customers, with businesses committing to carbon neutrality by 2030. However, AI’s increasing processing needs are driving up power consumption, requiring responsible energy management.
The growing reliance on AI raises concerns about escalating power demand and environmental impact. The industry is actively debating solutions, including renewable energy adoption and efficiency improvements in data centres, to mitigate these challenges while sustaining AI advancements.
Some analysts have interpreted Trump’s interventionist position, and the United States ‘ imposition of tariffs, as financially foolish.
If the democratic motto was again that” under completely business everyone wins”, it is now logical to think that, under protectionism, people will lose. It would also suggest the close of globalization, which had come at a great financial cost for the US.
In just the past few weeks, the US-Canada tax crisis has escalated significantly. The Ontario government responded to Trump’s threats with a 25 % tariff on electricity serving the states of Minnesota, New York and Michigan, prompting Trump to announce that he would raise tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminium to 50 %.
Soon after, Ontario authorities suspended the energy level climb, and Trump has now also walked up his hostile price hike.
Similar activities are taking place on the other side of the Atlantic as also, as the European Commission has responded to US tax risks on steel imports with its own package of actions targeting a range of American products.
Trump’s tale tilt has caused tumult, and seems to work contrary to US company objectives. But, a critical look at the benefits of free business – and the US ‘ unique position in relation to it – may help us understand the rise of protectionist conversation, and the US ‘ trade war with China.
Economic history shows that, when the US ‘ technological development outstripped its competitors, it was able to change completely trade into an instrument that protected its personal interests. At this point it, along with its allies, began to promote free trade as vital to the development of less advanced economies.
This resulted in globalization, which was what made it possible to manufacture goods in China at lower costs, thus keeping US wages and inflation in check and increasing the profits of US companies. As long as this remained the case, free trade with China served the interests of US companies and was therefore justifiable.
However, in recent years, China has shifted its economic strategy toward producing and exporting high-tech, value-added products ( as South Korea and Taiwan have also done ). Chinese-produced mobile phones, electric cars and artificial intelligence ( AI ) have subsequently conquered the US market.
The longer this shift goes on, the more useful and legitimate tariffs and protectionism become as a way to shield the economic interests of US businesses.
Protectionist rhetoric and trade wars were already trumpeted by the first Trump administration.
However, the KOF globalisation index– which measures the global connectivity, integration and interdependence of countries – showed the same value in 2021 as it did in 2017.
While the growth experienced since 1970 ground to a halt, the index’s indicators disprove any claim that globalization receded during Trump’s first term in office.
This second term may well be different because, according to some experts, the president has learned to bypass political counterweights, to surround himself with like-minded people, and to free himself from partisan ties in order to implement his own agenda.
Others, however, question the very existence of his own agenda beyond the interests of big business, because it is precisely this alignment of interests that allows him to:
In reality, Trump’s agenda is unlikely to be compatible with any meaningful de-globalization process. Reversing globalization would be contrary to the interests of US capital, which needs to expand – into both new territories and sectors – to ensure its own survival.
In light of all this, why would US multinationals want to stop making huge profits in other countries? What could lead them to give up producing in territories with lower production costs, cheaper labor and a guaranteed supply of raw materials?
According to IMF data, in the third quarter of 2024 the US dollar still accounted for more than 57 % of total international reserves, and more than 80 % of international trade financing.
When a country’s domestic currency acts as a reserve asset or is the currency in which most international payments are made, the financing of persistent current account deficits does not carry major risks of either devaluation or currency crisis. Every year since 1982, with the sole exception of 1991, the US current account balance has been negative.
These conditions for financing its debt – which Valéry Giscardd’Estaing, Charles de Gaulle’s Minister of Economy, defined in 1964 as an “exorbitant privilege” – improve even in times of crisis. The dollar’s status as a safe haven asset ( much like gold ) means that international demand for it actually increases in times of uncertainty.
So why would the US be in favour of shifting its trade balance, thereby renouncing the privilege of issuing the international reserve currency?
In his 2012 book The Globalisation Paradox, Turkish economist Dani Rodrik puts forward his theory of the” trilemma”. This theory states that democracy and national sovereignty are fundamentally incompatible with globalization.
Only those who accept the existence of this trilemma, and understand the tensions that arise from it, can then begin to pick apart one of its components. This is where Trump seems to have the upper hand.
He is playing a game of illusions, one where he publicly pretends to dynamite globalization while, behind the scenes, he stealthily dismantles the pillars of democracy.
Juan Carlos Palacios Cívico is profesor Agregado en el área de Política Económica y Desarrollo, Universitat de Barcelona
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Any company that wants to handle funds needs a money markets services permission from controller MAS, because portfolio management is a “regulated action” under the Securities and Futures Act 2001.
MAS considers elements such as the health, track record and management skills of candidates, as well as business programs and forecasts.
Businesses also need at least two managers, one of whom may be a tenant in Singapore. The agency’s chief executive officer needs to have at least 10 years of related practice, and become a Singapore citizen.
Two full-time, Singapore-based people must also be appointed for each restricted exercise the company wants to conduct.
Most important investment systems in Singapore are. This includes businesses like as Endowus, StashAway and Chocolate Finance.
A Financial Institutions Directory can be used to discover out whether a company is regulated or licensed by MAS, though the need for a passport depends on a fund’s business model.
MAS likewise maintains an Investor Alert List. It’s not comprehensive, but includes companies and people who may have been erroneously perceived as being licensed, authorised or regulated.
Businesses licensed by MAS are likely to be in better economic condition, said Professor Sumit Agarwal of the National University of Singapore’s business class.
They are also less likely to decline, and customers don’t have to worry as much if the corporation does go under, he added.
” It gives … the consumer confidence that, appearance, there is some regulatory supervision for the business”, said the doctor of finance, finance and real estate.
For companies with a capital areas companies permit for account management, MAS requires their customers ‘ funds to be separated from the bank’s monies.
Customers ‘ resources must be placed under separate prison. a
And the business is required to put in place a risk management framework as well as provide clear and transparent statements on the conditions of its service.
In the case of Chocolate Finance, customers ‘ monies are held in” isolated, ringfenced records” with the business and Allfunds, a bank distribution system.
In any case, nuclear energy requires stringent safety and regulatory supervision, involving many organisations.
Classification cultures evaluate the safety of new vessels and have begun issuing detailed guidelines for floating Biomarkers.  ,
Along with business partners, they established the Nuclear Energy Maritime Organisation last year to help national and international regulatory work. The International Maritime Organization, accountable for marine pollutants protection and vehicle health, and the International Atomic Energy Agency are also working on floating Biomarkers and nuclear-powered boats, given the increasing weather change-driven interest in them.
Selecting a protected and financially viable site may be important.  ,
Further waters are desirable for cooling purposes and constrained economic impacts, but a site like Changi may pose risks due to its proximity to the airport and possible airplane accidents affecting the plant. Coastal traffic regulations and protective measures, such as safety protocols, may be needed.  ,
Proximity to industrial plants on Jurong Island in demand of heat or steam could enhance economic viability, making the nuclear cogeneration plant ( s ) more cost competitive, and desalination is another option.
If Singapore decides to pursue nuclear energy, floating Biomarkers warrant serious consideration. They offer different advantages in place choice, deployment freedom, lack of vegetation requirements, and potential integration with business processes. But, financial viability, health, regulatory requirements, and economic impacts has been thoroughly evaluated to determine whether they coincide with Singapore’s long-term power strategy.
Stefan Huebner , is President of the , Society of Floating Solutions ( Singapore ) and Senior Research Fellow at the Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore. His latest research concerns the history and present condition of sea urbanization and urbanisation jobs.
PUBLISHED: 14 Mar 2025 at 04: 00
A police inspector in Sakon Nakhon territory has been arrested for his alleged role in a plot to murder a native man with four other defendants in a program to unlawfully claim 14 million baht in insurance payments.
Pol Lt Col Nanmanas Phosri, an inspector responsible for investigations, arrived at Wanon Niwat place in the northern county to surrender on Wednesday, but investigators took him into prison as he was wanted on an arrest warrant.
The crime story came to light after many insurance firms filed police problems, asking for an investigation into big statements following the death of a local person.
Wichian Jityen, 32, a native of Wanon Niwat city, died in a car accident involving three cars on the Ban Nabua-Charoensil street in tambon That of Wanon Niwat area on Feb 10. The three individuals involved in the fatal accident surrendered.
Reckless driving causing death claims were pressed against Somsak Wobao, 56, Phornchanok Onsurathum, 41, and Pheeraphat Raksakun, 40.
After investigators from Wanon Niwat place and the municipal authorities made more questions, they began to suspect that the accident was not an injury. They obtained a subpoena from the Sawang Daen Din municipal court to assault the three drivers and another person– Sakon Sonkaew, 38– for engaging in death.
During doubting, the defendants implicated a officers lieutenant colonel in a murder plot to obtain insurance payments. He was afterwards identified as Pol Lt Col Nanmanas.
Pol Maj Gen Somjit Laomongkolnitmit, commander of Sakon Nakhon policeman, said Pol Lt Col Nanmanas denied the claims.
Authorities were preparing to take the official to the municipal court to find his detention yesterday. An attempt suspending Pol Lt Col Nanmanas from the army pending the case results.
Four people accused of causing deadly car crash place hand at Sakon Nakhon officer
PUBLISHED: 13 Mar 2025 at 16: 12
A police inspector in Sakon Nakhon territory has been arrested at his office for alleged role in a story to murder a local person for a 14-million-baht insurance payment.
Pol Lt Col Nanmanas Phosri, an inspector responsible for studies, arrived at the Wanon Niwat place in the northern province to surrender on Wednesday, but authorities took him into custody as he was wanted on an arrest warrant.
The crime story came to light after staff from some insurance companies filed issues with authorities, asking for an investigation into big says following the death of a local person.
Wichian Jityen, 32, a native of Wanon Niwat area, died in a car accident involving three cars on the Ban Nabua-Charoensil street in tambon That of Wanon Niwat area on the day of Feb 10. Three vehicles involved in the fatal accident surrendered.
Claims of foolish moving causing death were pressed against Somsak Wobao, 56, Phornchanok Onsurathum, 41, and Pheeraphat Raksakun, 40.
After researchers from the Wanon Niwat place and the municipal authorities made more inquiries, they began to suspect that the fatal accident had been intentionally caused. They obtained a warrant from the Sawang Daen Din provincial court to arrest the three drivers and another man — Sakon or Mek Sonkaew, 38 — for colluding in murder.
During questioning, the suspects implicated a police lieutenant colonel in the murder plot to collect the insurance payout. He was later identified as Pol Lt Col Nanmanas.
Pol Maj Gen Somjit Laomongkolnitmit, chief of Sakon Nakhon police, said Pol Lt Col Nanmanas denied the charges.
Police were preparing to take the accused officer to the provincial court to seek his detention on Thursday. The provincial police chief said an order would be issued to suspend Pol Lt Col Nanmanas from the force pending the outcome of the case.
Ukraine’s material success has been a crucial factor in its negotiations with the US as the two nations work out information for a peace deal in Ukraine’s war with Russia.
After a rough stop to those conversations, representatives from the US and Ukraine announced an agreement on March 11, 2025. The US would resume support and knowledge sharing with Ukraine, with some problems, and both agreed to work toward” a detailed contract for developing Ukraine’s crucial material resources to expand Ukraine’s business and guarantee Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security”.
The initial news from Ukraine’s authorities stated that important minerals may likewise “offset the cost of British help”, but that collection was removed from the joint statement. Getting Russia to agree to a peace would be the next phase.
There’s no question that Ukraine has an abundance of vital minerals, or that these sources will be crucial to its postwar rebuilding. But what specifically do those solutions include, and how plentiful and accessible are they?
The conflict has significantly limited access to data about Ukraine’s natural resources. Nevertheless, as a geoscientist with expertise in asset evaluation, I have been reading professional reviews, many of them behind paywalls, to know what’s at stake. Here’s what we know.
Ukraine’s material assets are concentrated in two volcanic provinces. The larger of these, known as the Ukrainian Shield, is a broad belt running through the center of the country, from the north to the south. It consists of very ancient, tectonic and crystalline stones.
A multibillion-year story of wrong movement and volcanic action created a variety of materials concentrated in local sites and across some larger regions.
A second state, near to Ukraine’s borders with Russia in the south, includes a gap valley known as the Dnipro-Donets Depression. It is filled with sediment mountains containing coal, oil and natural gas.
Before Ukraine’s democracy in 1991, both places supplied the Soviet Union with supplies for its industrialization and defense. A substantial industrial region centered on steel grew in the southeast, where iron, iron and coal are particularly abundant.
By the 2000s, Ukraine was a major producer and exporter of these and other materials. It also mine plutonium, used for nuclear energy.
In addition, Russian and Polish geoscientists identified debris of potassium and rare earth metals that remain uninhabited.
However, technical reports suggest that assessments of these and some other essential minerals are based on outdated volcanic data, that a considerable amount of mines are dormant due to the war, and that many employ older, wasteful technology.
That suggests critical mineral production could be increased by peacetime foreign investment, and that these minerals could provide even greater value than they do today to whomever controls them.
Critical minerals are defined as resources that are essential to economic or national security and subject to supply risks. They include minerals used in military equipment, computers, batteries and many other products.
A list of 50 critical minerals, created by the US Geological Survey, shows that more than a dozen relied upon by the US are abundant in Ukraine.
A majority of those are in the Ukrainian Shield, and roughly 20 % of Ukraine’s total possible reserves are in areas currently occupied by Russia’s military forces.
Three critical minerals especially abundant in Ukraine are manganese, titanium and graphite. Between 80 % and 100 % of US demand for each of these currently comes from foreign imports.
Manganese is an essential element in steelmaking and batteries. Ukraine is estimated to have the largest total reserves in the world at 2.4 billion tons. However, the deposits are of fairly low grade – only about 11 % to 35 % of the rock mined is manganese. So it tends to require a lot of material and expensive processing, adding to the total cost.
This is also true for graphite, used in battery electrodes and a variety of industrial applications. Graphite occurs in ore bodies located in the south-central and northwestern portion of the Ukrainian Shield.
At least six deposits have been identified there, with an estimated total of 343 million tons of ore – 18.6 million tons of actual graphite. It’s the largest source in Europe and the fifth largest globally.
Titanium, a key metal for aerospace, ship and missile technology, is present in as many as 28 locations in Ukraine, both in hard rock and sand or gravel deposits. The size of the total reserve is confidential, but estimates are commonly in the hundreds of millions of tons.
A number of other critical minerals that are used in semiconductor and battery technologies are less plentiful in Ukraine but also valuable. Zinc occurs in deposits with other metals such as lead, gold, silver and copper.
Gallium and germanium are byproducts of other ores – zinc for gallium, lignite coal for germanium. Nickel and cobalt can be found in ultramafic rock, with nickel more abundant.
No figures for Ukraine’s reserves of these elements were available in early 2025, with the exception of zinc, whose reserves have been estimated at around 6.1 million tons, putting Ukraine among the top 10 nations for zinc.
Geologists have identified potentially significant volumes in Ukraine of three other types of critical minerals important for energy, military and other uses: lithium, rare earth metals and scandium.
None of these had been mined there as of early 2025, though a lithium deposit had been licensed for commercial extraction.
The largest potential lithium reserves exist at three sites in the south-central and southeastern Ukrainian Shield, where the grade of ore is considered moderate to good. How much lithium these reserves hold remains confidential, but technical reports suggest it’s on the order of 160 million tons of ore and 1.6 million to 3 million tons of lithium oxide.
If most of this could be recovered in a profitable way, it would place Ukraine among the top five nations for lithium.
Smaller volumes of tantalum and niobium, also used in steel alloys and technology, have also been identified in these reserves. Most of Ukraine’s lithium occurs as petalite, which, unlike the other main lithium mineral, spodumene, requires more expensive processing.
Rare earth elements in Ukraine are known to exist in several sites of volcanic origin and in association with uranium in the south-central portion of the Ukrainian Shield. These haven’t been developed, though sampling has indicated commercial potential in some sites, while other sites appear less viable.
Rare earth elements in high demand for superior magnets and electronics – neodymium, praseodymium, terbium and dysprosium – are all present in varying amounts in these areas. Other critical minerals are associated with these deposits, especially zirconium, tantalum and niobium, in undetermined but potentially significant amounts.
Finally, scandium, used in aluminum alloys for aerospace components, has been identified as a byproduct of processing titanium ores. Ukraine’s scandium does not appear to have been studied in enough detail to evaluate its commercial potential. However, world production, about 30 to 40 tons per year, is forecast to grow rapidly.
It’s clear that Ukraine is endowed with valuable resources. However, extracting them will require roads and railways for access, infrastructure such as electricity and mining and processing technology, investment, technical expertise, environmental considerations and, above all, cessation of military conflict.
Those are the true determinants of Ukraine’s mining future.
Scott L Montgomery is lecturer, Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.