Russia Ukraine War: Is The Us Interested In Restoring Peace...
Europe
Politics
The Russia- Ukraine war started in 2014 and has escalated to date, leaving devastating impacts and the death of many soldiers and citizens. The war between the two countries erupted due to boundary wrangles, with Russia insisting that Ukraine must remain neutral in its involvement with European powers due to security concerns to Russia and not join NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization). NATO was formed in 1949 to counter the influence of the Soviet Union on Europe after World War II. Ukraine was a former member of the Soviet Union, and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 resulted in Ukraine declaring its independence. Russia has been claiming to extend its borders to some parts of Ukraine, and the US claims that Ukraine should surrender to end the war. In 2022, the war took a new turn that attracted global attention and sparked different opinions, leading to a controversial debate about different countries' intentions in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. In many dynamics, the war has affected global relations and policies, whereby various countries and organizations have come out to render their voice. Among the vocal countries in this war are the world’s most powerful countries, such as the US, France, and the UK. While the UN champions peace among countries, its advocacy hasn’t brought any lasting solutions nor found an answer to the conflict, raising questions on the ability of UN to offer solutions to conflicts around the world. Interestingly, the idea of supporting peace for many countries is taking sides. As the war continues, claiming that they are advocating for “peace”, countries support either Russia or Ukraine, which raises questions on impartiality. According to recent events in the US and the European Union, the conduct and reasons for other countries' voices are questionable. The efforts to restore peace between the two countries are such rhetoric, as it sounds like a secret deal involving coercion, intimidation, and manipulation. The geopolitical arena has complicated efforts to restore peace, and instead, continuous threats against Ukraine by the US have overshadowed the pursuit of peace between Russia and Ukraine. In such circumstances where an issue affects the globe, nations play a critical role that should be impartial. However, in this particular war, nations' impartiality is questionable because they are taking a stand while taking a side. Peace is not lobbied by standing for or against because it creates division, leaving one party more aggressed. In the circumstances of this war, Russia is fighting for its empire, while Ukraine is fighting for its survival. This indicates the vulnerability of humanity for both sides of the war. In the Russia- Ukraine war, the US has stood out as a key player in facilitating war, and its recent actions urging Ukraine to withdraw show its partiality and raise questions of interest as it has shifted its support to Russia. During Biden's era, the US government supported Ukraine through military aid and stood against Russia by issuing economic sanctions. The US, in its capacity, would have sought other peace avenues instead of providing weapons and training Ukraine's forces in preparation for war. In the Trump administration, the US stand has evolved, and its position has shifted, which indicates changing interests and thus complicating the geopolitical space. While the US has been funding Ukraine, it ceased after the events of 28th February 2025, when the US President, Donald Trump, and Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, had some differences. However, it is established that in the recent ceasefire deal, Ukrainian minerals were of interest to the US, and the two countries struck a deal allowing the US to invest in the Ukraine minerals. Claiming that Ukraine is unthankful for US support makes US support questionable. Evaluating what followed on 28th February 2025 and the ceasefire deal leads to the question: Was the US supporting Ukraine to fuel the war of peace? This is no longer a dilemma because the US is asking for something back. Therefore, to get the Ukrainian minerals, the US strategically placed itself to render Ukraine vulnerable and in need of its support to pursue its interests. The Russia-Ukraine war presents a historical lesson to all countries that in every war, countries place themselves for their own benefits. Whenever a country goes to war, a country should evaluate its ability to sustain the war, its impacts on its society, and the cost to peace and human life. The days ahead present a complex side for the parties involved in the war, with each party seeking its own benefits from the war.
Read more3 DAYS AGO
Drc's Paradox: Can Drc Harness Innovation And Resources Amid Turbulence...
Africa
Business
The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is a nation of immense potential but deep contradictions. Rich in natural resources and home to a young, dynamic population, it has the foundations for economic growth. Yet, political instability, armed conflict, and corruption continue to hinder progress. Despite these challenges, a wave of technological innovation is reshaping key sectors, offering hope for a more prosperous future.The DRC’s political history has been turbulent, marked by coups, civil wars, and contested elections. The 2023 elections secured President Félix Tshisekedi a second term, but the political climate remains tense, with allegations of electoral fraud and governance inefficiencies. Corruption and weak institutions deter foreign investment, placing DRC 166th out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index. Despite governance issues, efforts to reform the business environment are underway. The government has introduced investment-friendly policies, including a revised mining code that increases state royalties on minerals and tax incentives for foreign companies. The Economic and Social Council (CESC) was established in 2022 to foster dialogue between the government, private sector, and civil society. However, implementation remains a challenge due to bureaucratic inefficiencies and weak enforcement. The business landscape is nonetheless evolving. DRC holds the world’s largest cobalt reserves, critical for electric vehicle (EV) batteries, alongside significant deposits of copper, gold, and diamonds. In 2022, mining contributed 17% of GDP and over 95% of export revenue. However, illegal mining operations, political interference, and inadequate infrastructure prevent the sector from realizing its full potential. Unlike Kenya or Rwanda, where stability fosters business growth, DRC’s unpredictable environment keeps many investors cautious. Yet, industries beyond mining, including agriculture and telecom, are showing resilience. For instance, Orange and Vodacom have expanded mobile money services, while agribusiness startups are improving food supply chains despite logistical hurdles. China and the USA are becoming major players in DRC’s Economy. China has cemented itself as DRC’s largest economic partner, particularly in the mining sector. Chinese firms control a significant portion of cobalt and copper mining operations, with companies like China Molybdenum (owner of the Tenke Fungurume mine) and Zijin Mining leading production. In 2008, China signed a $6 billion minerals-for-infrastructure deal, pledging roads, hospitals, and schools in exchange for mining concessions. However, concerns over exploitative contracts, environmental damage, and labor rights violations have led the Congolese government to renegotiate some of these deals. President Tshisekedi's administration has called for greater transparency and fairer terms, yet China remains deeply embedded in the country’s economic framework. To counter China, the United States has taken a more strategic approach, focusing on: Mineral Supply Chain Diversification – to reduce dependence on China, the U.S. has partnered with DRC and Zambia to establish a regional supply chain for battery metals, aiming to process cobalt and lithium locally rather than exporting raw materials to China. Governance & Transparency – The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) supports anti-corruption efforts and civil society organizations advocating for business reforms.Security Cooperation – the US administration has provided military aid for peacekeeping efforts and supported regional diplomatic initiatives to stabilize Eastern DRC.Despite these efforts, U.S. companies remain hesitant to invest heavily due to political instability and security risks. While American firms like Freeport-McMoRan once operated in the mining sector, many have scaled back, leaving China as the dominant player. The Shadow of War through M23 Rebellion had a significant Economic Impact in DRC. Eastern DRC remains plagued by conflict, with the resurgence of the M23 rebel group worsening an already dire humanitarian crisis. The violence has displaced over 6.9 million people and disrupted key trade routes, particularly in North Kivu, a region vital for agriculture and cross-border commerce. Accusations that Rwanda is backing M23 have further strained diplomatic relations and regional stability. The impact of conflict on economic development is profound. Insecurity discourages investment and disrupts supply chains, but it has also driven innovation. In response to instability: Fintech startups are developing mobile banking solutions for displaced populations. Blockchain-based land registries aim to secure property rights in unstable areas. Recognizing the economic cost of conflict, regional and international actors have stepped in: The East African Community (EAC) deployed military forces to stabilize the region. The African Development Bank (AfDB) committed $400 million for infrastructure projects to enhance regional trade. The U.S. and EU have pressured Rwanda and DRC to engage in peace talks, with sanctions on armed groups fueling instability. Despite political turmoil, DRC’s tech sector is expanding. Kinshasa and Lubumbashi are emerging as hubs for fintech, e-commerce, and agritech. Inspired by Kenya’s M-Pesa, mobile money services have brought financial inclusion to millions. By 2023, mobile penetration reached 46%, with over 20 million mobile money accounts. While DRC’s digital ecosystem lags behind Nigeria and South Africa, government-backed initiatives and international partnerships are fueling growth: The National Digital Plan (Plan National du Numérique 2025) aims to improve connectivity and support startups. Google’s $1 billion investment in African digital infrastructure includes fiber-optic expansion and digital training programs in DRC. China’s Huawei has been expanding 4G networks, despite concerns over cybersecurity and data privacy. Beyond international investments, local entrepreneurs are driving change: Flash International enables cross-border remittances. AgriZoom connects farmers with buyers, tackling market inefficiencies. Ingenious City in Kinshasa is nurturing a new generation of Congolese tech innovators. However, challenges remain: high internet costs, poor infrastructure, and inconsistent regulations hinder growth. If the government prioritizes regulatory clarity and digital investment, the country could position itself as a leading tech hub in Central Africa. Can DRC Turn Its Challenges into Opportunities? The DRC stands at a crossroads. With abundant natural resources, a youthful population, and a growing tech sector, the country has immense potential. However, without political reforms, stronger institutions, and improved security, sustainable economic growth will remain elusive.The role of international partners will be crucial in shaping DRC’s future. China remains the dominant economic force, particularly in mining and infrastructure, but faces growing scrutiny over its business practices. The USA is focusing on governance, mineral diversification, and security partnerships, aiming to counterbalance China’s influence.Regional organizations like the EAC and AfDB are pushing for economic stability and trade expansion. If DRC can leverage international investments, strengthen governance, and foster innovation, it could transform its wealth into long-term prosperity. By balancing global partnerships with domestic reforms, the country has the potential to emerge as Africa’s next economic powerhouse.
Read more3 DAYS AGO
South Korea’s Martial Law Crisis: Political Unrest, Impeachment Battles, And...
Asia
Politics
Martial law is the temporary imposition of direct military control over civilian government functions, usually in response to a crisis such as war, civil unrest, or political instability. Under martial law, normal legal and constitutional procedures may be suspended, curfews imposed and military personnel granted expanded powers to maintain order. When declared in democratic nations, martial law often leads to concerns about civil liberties the concentration of power, and potential human right abuses. In South Korea’s case, President Yoon Suk Yeol’s declaration of martial law in late 2024 triggered an unprecedented political crisis, shaking the nation’s democratic foundations. The Crisis began in December 2024 when President Yoon, facing mounting opposition from the National Assembly, declared martial law, citing threats to national security. This move was met with fierce resistance from opposition parties, activities and the general public who saw it as an attempt to consolidate power. In response, South Korean parliament swiftly moved to impeach Yoon, marking only the second time in the nation’s history that a sitting president faced such action. Following Yoon’s impeachment, Prime Minister Han Duck-soo stepped in as acting president, only to be impeached shortly after. This left Finance Minister Choi Sang-mak as the next in the line for leadership, further deepening the nation’s instability. The political upheaval has triggered massive rallies across the country. Supporters of Yoon argue that his actions were necessary to curb anti-state activities, while critics believe he attempted am authoritarian power grab. Protesters have taken to the streets in Seoul and other major cities, demanding a resolution to the crisis and the restoration of democratic order. As the Constitutional Court deliberates on Yoon’s impeachment, other high-ranking officials have faced legal scrutiny. Former Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun is on trial for alleged insurrection related to the martial law decree denying any wrongdoing. Meanwhile, the United States has classified South Korea as a “sensitive” country, potentially impacting bilateral relations and cooperation in sectors such as energy and technology. As of March 2025, the political crisis remains unresolved. The Constitutional Court is still reviewing the impeachment case, with both sides presenting arguments on whether Yoon’s actions constituted a constitutional violation. If the court rules against Yoon, a new presidential election may be scheduled within months. If the court reinstates him, South Korea could see further unrest as opposition groups have vowed to continue protests. The Democratic Party has introduced a motion to impeach acting President Choi Sang-mok accusing him of obstructing the appointment of a liberal Constitutional Court justice and vetoing key legislation. If this impeachment proceeds, South Korea could face yet another leadership vacuum, deepening instability. At the same time, economic uncertainty looms. Foreign investors have expressed concerns over the prolonged crisis, with the South Korean won experiencing fluctuations amid political uncertainty. Relations with the United States and China are also under scrutiny as both major powers closely monitor South Korea’s shifting political landscape. The ongoing crisis leaves South Korea at a crossroad. If Yoon’s impeachment is upheld the national will likely face a new election, potentially ushering in a new political era. However, if the court overturns the impeachment, it could fuel further protests and deepen political divisions. Additionally, opposition parties have now moved to impeach Acting President Choi Sang-mok, signaling that instability may persist in the months ahead. The outcome of the crisis will likely shape South Korea’s governance for years to come, determining the strength of its democratic institutions and the resilience of its leadership. South Korea’s democratic resilience is being put to the test as the country grapples with leadership turmoil and public discontent. The resolution of this crisis will not only shape the nation’s political landscape but also have lasting implications for its international reputation and economic stability. As the world watches, South Korea must navigate these turbulent times while preserving its democratic integrity and ensuring a stable future.
Read more4 DAYS AGO
Politics, Corruption, And Business: The Complex Path To Haiti's Economic...
NorthAmerica
Politics
Politics and business are deeply intertwined, shaping the trajectory of nations—for better or worse. Few places illustrate this connection more vividly than Haiti, where political instability and business challenges have created a cycle that stifles progress. Political stability is the bedrock of a thriving economy. Investors—local and international—seek stable governments that ensure predictable regulations, safety, and fair competition. Haiti has experienced its share of political instabilities. Over 33 coups and attempted coups since Haiti’s independence in 1804. In the last decade alone, Haiti has experienced 12+ major political protests, leading to roadblocks, business shutdowns, and public unrest. Ranked 170 out of 180 countries on the 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index (Transparency International), signaling extremely weak governance structures. As of 2024-2025, Haiti’s political situation remains precarious. The assassination of President Jovenel Moïse in July 2021 plunged the country into deeper turmoil, with no elected president or functioning parliament in place. Armed gangs have grown more powerful, controlling vast areas of Port-au-Prince and other regions, effectively limiting government authority. In response, international interventions have been initiated to restore order. Most notably, in late 2023, a Kenya-led multinational security mission was approved by the UN to assist Haitian police in curbing gang violence. Despite initial optimism, the deployment faced delays due to legal challenges in Kenya and logistical issues. By early 2025, Kenyan forces, along with contingents from other countries, have started arriving in Haiti. However, the impact of this intervention is mixed. While the presence of foreign forces has helped contain some gang activities and reopen blocked supply routes, critics argue that without deep institutional reforms and Haitian leadership, foreign military presence may offer only short-term relief. There are also concerns about human rights abuses and lack of accountability among foreign troops, which could worsen public trust in both domestic and international efforts. Following the catastrophic 2010 earthquake, over $13 billion in international aid was pledged to Haiti. However, due to political infighting, corruption, and lack of coordination, much of this aid was mismanaged or delayed. This hampered business recovery, stalled infrastructure development, and deterred private investors. Many businesses that entered Haiti post-disaster eventually pulled out, citing regulatory unpredictability and persistent security concerns. Corruption has been such a barrier to business growth in Haiti. Corruption within political institutions inflates the cost of doing business, limits market competition, and suppresses entrepreneurship. According to the World Bank, over 50% of Haiti’s GDP is informal, with businesses operating outside regulated systems to avoid bureaucracy and corruption. The infamous PetroCaribe scandal involved the alleged misappropriation of $2 billion of public funds earmarked for development projects—undermining both business confidence and public trust. Haiti’s rank on the 2020 Doing Business Index: 179 out of 190 countries, reflecting excessive red tape, corruption, and regulatory barriers faced by businesses. In Haiti, a small group of powerful business elites controls key sectors like imports, telecommunications, and petroleum, wielding significant influence over political decisions. It is estimated that less than 5% of the population controls over 85% of Haiti’s wealth, creating an oligarchic structure. These elites often finance political campaigns in exchange for favorable policies, tax breaks, and monopolistic control. This dynamic prevents new business entrants, perpetuates economic inequality, and fuels further political instability. Nonetheless, government policies can either stimulate or stifle economic growth. In Haiti, certain policies have shown promise, while others have limited the country’s potential. Such a case is the Garment Industry contributing to 90% of the country’s exports and employing over 57,000 workers. It has benefited from U.S. policies like the HOPE and HELP Acts, which allow Haitian-made textiles duty-free access to U.S. markets, stimulating growth. However, challenges persist: frequent labor strikes due to low wages and poor working conditions. Unreliable electricity supply, with Haiti having the lowest electrification rate in the Western Hemisphere (44% access rate). Political unrest frequently disrupts production schedules and export logistics. Can Haiti break the cycle? For Haiti to unlock sustainable economic growth, it must address the vicious cycle of political dysfunction and business stagnation. Key reforms include: Institutional Reforms Strengthen the independence of the judiciary, anti-corruption bodies, and electoral commissions to build investor trust and uphold rule of law. Transparency and Accountability: Enforce transparent public spending practices and hold corrupt officials accountable. This will create a level playing field, encouraging small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to thrive. Inclusive Economic Policies: Promote broader participation in the economy, particularly among women and youth—who represent over 60% of Haiti’s population under 25. Reducing wealth concentration fosters social stability and innovation. Public-Private Partnerships Encourage collaboration between government and ethical business leaders to rebuild infrastructure, create employment opportunities, and enhance social welfare programs. Haiti stands at a critical crossroads where politics and business profoundly affect one another. Without transparent, stable governance, businesses will continue to suffer. Conversely, without a fair and competitive business environment, political power will remain concentrated in the hands of a few elites. While the deployment of Kenyan-led forces shows international commitment to stabilizing Haiti, long-term peace will depend on empowering Haitian institutions and fostering economic inclusivity. Breaking this cycle requires strong institutions, inclusive policies, and mutual trust between the government, private sector, and the people of Haiti. A stable political landscape could finally unleash Haiti’s full economic potential, paving the way for sustainable development and shared prosperity.
Read more4 DAYS AGO
Eu’s Digital Markets Act Targets Big Tech: Is It A...
Europe
Technology
The European Commission has made a strong move to impose the Digital Markets Act (DMA) on big American tech giants such as Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta. The imposition is a historic benchmark in the regulatory background of the EU as it seeks to prevent monopolistic tendencies and promote fair competition in digital markets. The Digital Markets Act, which became applicable in November 2022, is a legislative tool that aims to halt anti-competitive behavior on the part of large digital platforms, referred to as gatekeepers. Gatekeepers are companies with market dominance over digital services with gatekeeper ability to control entry to important online services. The DMA provides open rules to inhibit these companies from applying their market power to act against their rivals and limit the choice of consumers. The DMA gatekeepers must provide fair access to their platform to third-party businesses, avoid self-preferencing, enable interoperability, ensure transparency, and block anti-competitive bundling. In March 2025, enforcement proceedings were launched by the European Commission against Google and Apple for DMA breach. The regulatory body blamed the tech behemoths for prioritizing their own services unfairly and imposing restrictions on developers. Google was cited for having its own privileges on its products in the search results against competitors. Apple was quoted for restricting third-party developers' access to fundamental features of iOS, which makes it more difficult for competitors to provide similar services. The penalties for failing to comply with the DMA are quite stringent. Offending gatekeepers would be penalized up to 10% of their global annual turnover, doubled to 20% for successive infractions. To put that in context, a 10% penalty on Google would be over $25 billion, and on Apple, over $30 billion. The EU has also warned that persistent abuses could lead to structural sanctions, including the potential separation of business units or forced sale of parts of their European operations. The implementation of the DMA should have profound effects on the digital economy. Consumers and businesses will benefit from more competition, better service quality, greater choice, and better prices. Developers and small businesses will have further level-up opportunities to compete against leading tech operators. Publishers and advertisers will have enhanced transparency over the development of their information, preventing technology giants from running away with online ad revenue. As the U.S. is expected to react to the EU's regulatory crackdown, European tech firms such as SAP, ASML, and Spotify could face retaliatory measures or similar policy frameworks in the U.S. This could create an increasingly hostile regulatory environment, exacerbating the already strained relations between the European Union and the United States. The tech trade war, which has been brewing over data privacy laws, taxation policies, and antitrust regulations, might intensify as both sides push their regulatory agendas. The extent to which this leads to economic fragmentation and a divided digital market remains to be seen. The EU’s tough implementation of the DMA is watched closely by other areas, such as the United States, the UK, and Australia, which are weighing up similar legislation. Certain U.S. legislators have welcomed the EU’s action, stating that such steps should also be taken in the U.S. Large tech companies are fighting against tougher controls. Google and Apple have denied any wrongdoing, with Apple maintaining that its bounds are intended to protect user security and Google arguing that its search results are optimized for relevance, not preference. The Digital Markets Act is a milestone in the way the EU regulates tech giants, deepening the tenet of fair competition and consumer protection. As the first major enforcement cases begin, the coming months will put to the test how tech companies respond to the new regulations and if this policy will establish the precedent for future international digital market regulation. As the EU continues to monitor compliance, such a crackdown would reshape the digital economy and reset the balance of power between large tech firms, companies, and consumers in Europe and globally.
Read more8 DAYS AGO
The Great Capital Shift: Why Investment Funds Are Flowing From...
Europe
Business
There is an extreme realignment of global investment patterns as funds rapidly flow from the United States to Europe. This capital reallocation is driven by a combination of economic, political, and financial market factors that are redirecting the orientation of investors. The U.S. has been the world finance leader for years, attracting investments due to its strong economic growth and surging stock market. However, early 2025 witnessed a dramatic change, with investors increasingly favoring European markets over American assets. One of the primary reasons behind this is growing concerns regarding the U.S. economy. Investors have grown more sceptical of its future growth prospects, with the latest Bank of America Fund Manager Survey revealing that 83% of investors now view a slowdown in the U.S. economy as likely, up from a sharply higher 28% last month. Inflation, heightened interest rates, and threats of an economic slowdown have turned investors off keeping too much exposure to American assets. With doubt in the air, capital is searching for outlets elsewhere, and Europe is becoming a prime destination. The economic outlook in Europe, meanwhile, is also brightening, fuelled by bold fiscal action and renewed investor confidence. Germany, widely regarded as the economic powerhouse of Europe, has introduced key fiscal stimulus packages to revive growth and industrial production. This has created optimism among investors, as net optimism regarding European economic growth has risen from 9% to 60% in just two months. Increased defense spending across the region, driven largely by geopolitical uncertainty and the need for greater autonomy, is also playing a major role in attracting investment. As the countries of Europe demonstrate a more solid commitment to long-term economic stability, global investors are increasingly concentrating their attention on the continent. Another crucial factor that has prompted investors to move capital to Europe is the impact of tariffs. Trade policies implemented by the U.S., including tariffs on European goods and retaliatory measures from the EU, have disrupted supply chains and increased costs for American firms. In response, many multinational corporations and investors have shifted their focus to Europe, where tariff stability allows for smoother operations and lower trade-related expenses. European countries, leveraging their trade agreements and economic alliances, have capitalized on this shift, positioning themselves as attractive alternatives for global investment. A key driver of money leaving America and going into Europe is the relative value between stock markets. European equities are now viewed as more valued than equities in America. While volatility has stormed in the S&P 500, blue-chip stocks in Europe have surged 9% year to date, significantly outperforming U.S. markets, which have dropped nearly 4% for the year. The valuation gap is drawing institutional investors who view European stocks to be undervalued with good growth potential. In addition, Europe’s movement towards energy independence and a greener economy is revealing new investment themes in the renewable energy, technology, and infrastructure sectors. The financial sector itself is reacting to this trend, with major asset managers strategically positioning themselves to take advantage of the trend. BlackRock, a global investment leader, has introduced new services in Europe alongside local banks to target local investors with unique products. Some examples include sustainable investment funds focusing on green energy, private equity portfolios tailored to European SMEs, and customized wealth management solutions that integrate local economic conditions. This effort not only is attracting European funds but is also prompting similar efforts from U.S. funds, accelerating capital movement. By embracing the changing investment culture in the region, international finance groups are increasing the attractiveness of Europe as a successful investment hub. Political factors are also the reasons behind the diversion of funds. Increased regulatory pressures in the U.S., uncertainty about future monetary policy, and political stability issues have increased investor conservatism. Europe is, on the other hand, being perceived as a more stable and certain investment environment, particularly as it moves towards greater economic integration and regulatory certainty. Despite potential problems, such as an ongoing energy crisis and geopolitics, investors are prepared to risk Europe’s strength and future potential. The trend of reallocating funds from the U.S. to Europe is a turning point for global finance. While confidence in the American economy continues to erode and Europe stabilizes its economic base, investors are proceeding cautiously to reap better yields. This trend will continue as long as Europe leads the charge and the U.S. struggles with economic headwinds. The great capital shift is not a temporary aberration but a reflection of deeper structural changes in the global economy. Investors everywhere are paying close attention, and the financial landscape is changing before our very eyes.
Read more8 DAYS AGO