Connect with us

ASIA

Afghanistan infrastructure and agriculture

Published

on

Over the course of the US occupation of Afghanistan, which began 20 years ago till August 2021, the US has invested billions of dollars in major infrastructure projects, schools, hospitals, water and energy facilities as well as construction of thousands of miles of roads.

Indeed now Afghanistan has miles of asphalt roads, but not across Afghanistan, Afghans in provinces and rural areas still travel on poor roads. The same applies in schools, the Afghans were lacking schools, even in Kabul the capital city and regards to hospitals, there were several reports that US forces targeted hospitals and killed patients. After the incident the US forces called it a mistaken operation. Several hospitals were built but there were no treatment facilities, and no beds. Regarding water and energy, the Afghans are still scrambling with the lack of potable water.

Water and electricity shortages

On 8 of September, the residents of Kabul city said they are facing shortages of drinking water. One of the residents, Ahmad said that he walks everyday for about 30 minutes to bring drinking water home. Taliban said they have a plan to bring water to Kabul from Panjshir province and the project costs between $120 to $150 million to annually transfer 120 million cubic meters of water to Kabul. And in regards to energy, Afghanistan is still facing a huge difficulty in terms of electricity. Afghanistan imports 78% of its electricity from abroad. Afghanistan’s state power company Da Afghanistan Breshna Sherkat (DABS) in October of 2021, appealed for $90 million to settle nearly three months of unpaid electricity bills. DABAS said that the neighboring states have the right to cut the power because they did not pay money to them but we convinced them that they pay them. Afghanistan usually pays $20-$25 million a month to Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Iran for electricity.

US against hydroelectric dams in Afghanistan

Once there was a report that a top US official said that they don’t have a plan to build hydroelectric dams to produce energy, and told the Afghan officials to use imported electricity and generators to produce electricity. Afghanistan has several dams and the money that was spent on buying electricity from neighboring countries, was better spent on operationalizing these dams. Reportedly the US official was Robert Gates, the former US defense secretary who opposed the idea of building dams in Afghanistan.

Dahla Dam in southern Afghanistan

The US also did not help to improve the agriculture sector in Afghanistan as well, despite knowing the fact that Afghanistan is an agricultural land and over 40% of the population engaged in agricultural activities and 77% percent of Afghans in rural areas were engaged in farming. There was some work, but not a fundamental one. Irrigation system was also very poor and many farmers were complaining about the lack of water.

US spent $145 billion dollars in Afghanistan reconstruction

According to the SIGAR report, the US has spent 145 billion dollars in the reconstruction of Afghanistan over the past twenty years, which is considerably more than the Marshall Plan’s budget for the reconstruction of sixteen European nations. But the ground reality is speaking today of a fact that these money were either ended up in the pocket of corrupt US and Afghan officials or transformed back to US through various ghost projects.

Indeed, After September 11, 2001, Afghanistan’s economy did grow, but fundamental work in this sector was not done. The World Bank report shows Afghanistan’s GDP from 2002 to 2014; the graph increases and reaches from 4 billion to 20 billion dollars, but then it declines once again.

Afghanistan’s GDP per year according to the World Bank’s report

  • 4 billion dollars in 2002
  • 4.5 billion dollars in 2003
  • 5.23 billion dollars in 2004
  • 6.21 billion dollars in 2005
  • 6.97 billion dollars in 2006
  • 9.75 billion dollars in 2007
  • 10.11 billion dollars in 2008
  • 12.42 billion dollars in 2009
  • 15.86 billion dollars in 2010
  • 17.81 billion dollars in 2011
  • 19.91 billion dollars in 2012
  • 20.15 billion dollars in 2013
  • 20.5 billion dollars in 2014
  • 19.13 billion dollars in 2015
  • 18.12 billion dollars in 2016
  • 18.75 billion dollars in 2017
  • 18.5 billion dollars in 2018
  • 18.8 billion dollars in 2019
  • 20.12 billion dollars in 2020
  • 15 billion dollars in 2021

Afghans fragile economy

However, with the withdrawal of US forces and the collapse of the republic administration, Afghanistan’s economy was abruptly on the brink of collapse and especially after seizing $9b in Afghan assets by the US, several infrastructure projects that had been started with government funds were not finished. The US has never supported fundamental projects, even the work of large regional projects such as CASA-1000, TAP and TAPI started over six years ago, have not been completed so far.

The TAPI project, which was launched by the leaders of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, and India in December 2015, was supposed to be operationalized by the end of 2019, but is yet to finish. Currently the practical work on this project has been halted and it is unclear when the gas pipeline will pass through Afghanistan to provide the country with gas, and also help Pakistan and India in transforming gas through a pipeline.

ASIA

5 points in the indictment of Indian billionaire Gautam Adani

Published

on

The indictment of Indian tycoon Gautam Adani, Asia’s second richest man, on bribery charges in a U.S. federal court on Wednesday shocked India.

The charges put his empire under renewed scrutiny less than two years after allegations of financial irregularities by short-seller Hindenburg Research wiped $130bn off the group’s public market value.

Who is Gautam Adani?

Gautam Adani is the founder and chairman of the Adani Group, which has interests in renewable energy, ports, airports, construction materials, food and media. He is often referred to as ‘Number 1’ and ‘Big Man’ by other defendants in the case.

Adani, 62, from a middle-income textile family in the western Indian state of Gujarat, set up his group in 1988 to trade in commodities. Over time, Adani grew his business through an aggressive leverage strategy, moving into many sectors critical to the country’s infrastructure. The group was worth around $170 billion before the indictment led to the sale of its listed assets.

Adani’s rise mirrors that of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, himself from Gujarat. Modi’s political opponents have often claimed that Modi has favored the billionaire, as Adani has benefited greatly from the tenders it has won for public projects thanks to the Modi government’s infrastructure development drive. Both Adani and the government have denied any special treatment.

What are the charges?

U.S. prosecutors allege that Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani and six other defendants conspired to pay $265 million in bribes to Indian government officials to secure ‘lucrative solar power supply contracts’. The defendants also allegedly ‘concealed’ the bribes from U.S.-based investors in order to ‘obtain billions of dollars in financing’.

The bribery scheme, dubbed the ‘Corrupt Solar Power Project’ in the indictment, centered on numerous solar power contracts awarded by the state-owned Solar Energy Corporation of India to Adani’s renewable energy unit and another Indian company, Azure Power.

Adani and others have also been charged by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission with making ‘materially false or misleading’ statements about anti-bribery practices when raising $750 million from investors in September 2021, including $175 million from U.S. investors.

How will the indictment affect the Group’s business?

Following the indictment, 11 of the conglomerate’s twelve companies collectively lost around $27 billion in value on Thursday, a repeat of the collapse in January 2023, when Hindenburg Research accused the group of stock manipulation and improper use of offshore tax havens, among other allegations.

Shares in holding company Adani Enterprises fell more than 22%, while shares in Adani Green Energy, the focus of the investigation, fell nearly 19%. Only New Delhi Television (NDTV), the news media arm of the conglomerate, closed marginally higher. Shares in most Adani companies continued to fall in early trading on Friday.

“The indictment could affect Adani’s upcoming fundraising plans. Adani Green Energy has reportedly cancelled the sale of $600 million in U.S. dollar-denominated bonds. The biggest short-term impact of this development is that the Adani Group may find it difficult to raise new funds, especially from leading financial institutions, until its name is cleared,” said Abhishek Basumallick, founder of investment advisory firm Intelsense.

Late on Thursday, Kenyan President William Ruto said he was cancelling Adani’s purchase of a controlling stake in the country’s main airport and a $736 million public-private partnership with the company to build power transmission lines.

How have the Adani Group and the Indian government responded?

In a statement on Thursday, the Adani Group rejected the charges in the indictment, calling them ‘baseless’.

As the U.S. Department of Justice has stated, the charges in the indictment are allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty,’ the group said in a statement: ‘All available legal remedies will be pursued.

There has been no official reaction from the Indian government.

Jaideep Mazumdar, Joint Secretary (East) in the Ministry of External Affairs, declined to comment when asked about the Adani issue during a press conference on Modi’s visit to Guyana in South America. “This is a press conference organised for the Indian Prime Minister’s visit to Guyana and the India-CARICOM (Caribbean Community) Summit, and I am not in a position to respond to questions beyond this mandate,” he said in Guyana’s capital, Georgetown.

Modi’s political rivals have launched a series of attacks on the billionaire.

Rahul Gandhi, senior leader of the Indian National Congress, said at a press conference on Thursday: “Adani has in a way taken over India; the country is in the grip of Adani. So, India’s airports, ports, defence industry… it is a partnership. Modi is on one side of the partnership and Adani is on the other,” he said.

Gandhi is also the leader of the opposition in the lower house of parliament and is in a powerful position to have a say in the appointment of a director of the Central Bureau of Investigation, the country’s anti-crime agency. Gandhi said his party would raise Adani’s charges in the winter session of parliament, which begins on Monday.

Is extradition expected to come up?

There is an ongoing investigation into Adani, launched last year by India’s securities regulator in the wake of the Hindenburg Research allegations.

Lawyers in India and the U.S. have said that U.S. prosecutors may seek the extradition of Adani and other defendants in the latest charges. The two countries have had an extradition treaty in place since 1997.

Prashant Mendiratta, a lawyer at the Delhi High Court, said the Indian Ministry of External Affairs would be the primary decision-maker if the U.S. government made an extradition request.

“If the Indian government refuses extradition, the prosecution can approach the Indian judiciary with a petition against the decision … there is a high probability that this will turn into a two-front legal battle,” Mendiratta added.

The Indo-U.S. extradition treaty also stipulates that an offence must be punishable by imprisonment of one year or more before extradition can be granted. Under India’s Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) Act, bribery is only punishable by up to one year in prison.

The more stringent Prevention of Corruption Act (PoCA) can also be applied in this case.

However, for the PoCA to apply, it must be proven that a bribe was solicited and accepted by the government official.

“Obviously we are aware of these allegations,” White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre said at a press briefing on Thursday when asked if the U.S. was concerned that the charges against Adani could damage bilateral relations: “What I would say is that we believe that the relationship between the United States and India rests on an extremely strong foundation based on the relationship between our peoples and cooperation on the full range of global issues.”

Continue Reading

ASIA

Trump’s trade stance pushes Asian countries toward regional alliances

Published

on

Asian countries are responding to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s protectionist rhetoric by placing greater emphasis on regional and bilateral trade agreements aimed at promoting transnational economic cooperation without U.S. involvement, analysts say.

After being sworn in for a second term on January 20, 2024, Trump made tariffs a cornerstone of his campaign, pledging to impose duties of up to 20% on U.S. imports across the board, as well as a 60% tariff on Chinese goods.

At the recent Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in Peru, leaders from many of the 21 member economies called for greater regional economic integration as geopolitical tensions rise and supply chains become increasingly fragile.

China signed a stronger trade agreement with Peru.

Indonesia finalized a trade deal with Canada.

Singapore’s Prime Minister, Lawrence Wong, emphasized the importance of reviving the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Area, an agreement still under negotiation among APEC economies.

“APEC is more important now than it was before,” Wong said, highlighting the urgency of collaboration.

Multilateral regional economic partnerships

Trade deals excluding Washington, such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), are expected to become more vital for Asian countries in the coming years.

“This will help us manage some of the chaos and damage from the collapsing global system,” said Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation, an Asia-based group promoting sustainable trade, in an interview with Nikkei Asia.

The RCEP, a trade agreement involving 15 Asia-Pacific countries—including China, Japan, South Korea, and ASEAN members—was signed in November 2020 after eight years of negotiation. Together, these countries account for roughly 30% of global GDP.

In 2017, Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), leaving Japan to lead the revised agreement. Renamed the CPTPP, the 11-member group, including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and Vietnam, is entering its sixth year. Trade between members rose 5.5% between 2018 and 2021. The United Kingdom joined in December, while China has expressed interest in becoming a member.

Given Trump’s anti-globalization stance, analysts suggest that Japan should expand the CPTPP by adding members and deepening cooperation with the European Union.

A Chinese delegate at APEC remarked, “At the end of the day, we have many trading partners.”

However, China’s own economic policies could pose challenges to regional trade cooperation.

Priyanka Kishore, founder of consultancy Asia Decoded, emphasized that China must boost domestic consumption and increase imports to strengthen regional trade.

“China has a crucial role to play in supporting the region’s external demand,” Kishore told Nikkei Asia, adding, “It needs to do more if it wants to be the champion of intra-regional trade.”

Finding new trading partners could take years

Higher U.S. tariffs could hit Asian economies hard, particularly those with trade-to-GDP ratios exceeding 100%, such as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Vietnam. Currently, only Singapore and South Korea have free trade agreements with the U.S.

Tariffs, paid by importers in the U.S. and collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, raise costs that are often passed on to consumers. However, they also hurt foreign exporters by making their goods less competitive.

According to research by Yang Zhou, an economist at Fudan University, the U.S.-China trade war cost China $35 billion, and the U.S. $15 billion in 2018 alone.

A study by Global Trade Alert, an independent organization monitoring world trade policies, explored how Asian countries might cope with losing access to the U.S. market. It concluded that it would take these countries an average of five years to establish new trade partnerships.

For countries like Thailand, the timeline could extend to 24 years, as they shift trade to China, the EU, Vietnam, and Japan. For South Korea, it might take until 2038 to fully replace the U.S. as a trading partner.

Continue Reading

ASIA

China resumes visa-free travel for Japanese citizens

Published

on

China’s Foreign Ministry announced on Friday that the government will waive visa requirements for Japanese citizens traveling to the country starting 30 November.

Japan now joins a group of European countries, including Bulgaria, Romania, and Croatia, that have been added to China’s visa-free travel list. This arrangement will remain in effect until the end of next year.

The latest exemptions bring the total number of eligible countries to 38. Additionally, Beijing has extended the visa-free stay duration from 15 to 30 days.

This decision follows a meeting between Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Chinese President Xi Jinping during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in Peru last week. Both leaders agreed to cooperate based on their “common strategic interests.”

China had suspended visa exemptions for Japanese and other travelers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Since lifting its zero-COVID policy in 2023, Beijing has reinstated visa-free entry for dozens of countries in Europe and Southeast Asia. However, Japanese citizens still required visas for stays of 15 days or less—until now.

Japanese authorities have been urging Beijing to relax visa policies, aiming to facilitate travel for business and leisure. While this latest move simplifies access, it remains unclear if it will lead to a substantial rise in Japanese visitors to China, given ongoing challenges such as the weak yen, which has dampened outbound travel from Japan.

Conversely, Chinese citizens traveling to Japan must still obtain visas, a policy that predates the pandemic. According to Japanese media, Tokyo is not planning to offer reciprocal visa-free travel to China but is considering simplifying visa procedures to ease the process for Chinese visitors.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey