The United Kingdom is on the verge of signing a £1.6 billion trade deal with Gulf states.

This agreement with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)—comprising Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—will mark Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s fourth major trade pact, following accords with the US, India, and the EU.

The UK government has announced its hope that the agreement will contribute an additional £8.6 billion annually to trade with GCC countries by 2035. Sources close to the negotiations in the oil-rich region stated that the deal is currently in its final stages, with an expectation that the UK will approve it shortly.

The deal appears particularly advantageous for the automotive industry and financial services. However, projections indicate the free trade agreement will likely contribute less than 0.1% to GDP over the next decade.

Nevertheless, a backlash is anticipated concerning a chicken import component of the deal, which could significantly harm British farmers due to potentially lower animal welfare standards in imported products.

According to information obtained by The Guardian, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) is among those urging caution regarding the agreement and has communicated its concerns to ministers.

Human rights organizations have previously contended that the UK should not enter into the free trade agreement without legally binding commitments to enhance human rights, particularly for migrant workers. They have emphasized that both the UK and the GCC should integrate robust human rights clauses into all future agreements, and that the UK government should transparently present an independent impact assessment on the potential consequences of deepening trade relations.

Another source familiar with the negotiations suggested that while some language addressing human rights is likely to be included as part of the commitments, there will be no legal obligation.

A spokesperson for the Department for Business and Trade confirmed that negotiations for a trade deal with the GCC are ongoing, with no deadline set. Ministry sources noted the possibility of a pause in negotiations due to Eid al-Adha, which commences on June 6.

The UK-GCC trade agreement will also affect the UK’s net-zero emission targets, as all six GCC nations rank among the top 10 globally for per capita carbon emissions.

TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak remarked, “The TUC has directly conveyed its concerns to ministers about the trade deal with Gulf countries, and we will continue to do so. Our view on trade deals is consistent: the government should not make deals with countries that violate human rights and workers’ rights and flout international law. It was the right decision for the government to suspend trade talks with Israel.”

Ministers are also expected to face opposition from the National Farmers’ Union concerning the agricultural aspects of the agreement. Industry representatives informed The Guardian that the deal might grant unrestricted access for chicken imports, provided they meet hygiene standards.

Trade Secretary Douglas Alexander is leading the negotiations and is reportedly prepared to finalize the work initiated by the Conservative government. This deal is viewed as a more concrete prospect than the agreement with India, which was signed two weeks prior. Alexander is anticipated to meet with his counterpart for final approval.

Former Trade Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan had previously assured Parliament that the deal “would not come at the expense of human rights.”

Members of Parliament had noted precedents for including rights issues in trade agreements, citing the New Zealand deal, which features a chapter with commitments ensuring indigenous peoples play a role in their country’s future development.

Nick Thomas-Symonds, who was the shadow trade secretary at the time, stated while in opposition, “It is crucial that human rights, women’s rights, and workers’ rights are incorporated into the UK’s trade negotiations.”

However, during recent discussions under the Labour government, House of Lords Trade Minister Baroness Jones asserted that while the UK is a “leading advocate for human rights globally,” this advocacy is pursued separately from free trade agreement negotiations. Speaking in the House of Lords last year, she commented, “While some aspects of trade policy can provide opportunities to address other issues in bilateral relationships, free trade agreements are generally not the most effective or targeted tool for advancing human rights issues.”

UAE Trade Minister Dr. Thani bin Ahmed al-Zeyoudi told Politico in 2023 that if the UK and other Western countries “want more market access and more business opportunities,” they should “soften” standard human and worker rights provisions in trade deals.

Government estimates indicate that trade with this bloc, the UK’s seventh-largest export market, is valued at approximately £59 billion annually. The trade agreement is projected to increase this trade by about 16%.

Sovereign wealth funds in Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, are among the largest foreign investors in the United Kingdom.

European defense companies indicate that Japan has been rapidly opening its doors to non-American military equipment suppliers since the election of US President Donald Trump.

According to the Financial Times (FT), Tokyo’s growing inclination to turn to suppliers outside its traditional defense partner was a focal point at Japan’s largest defense industry fair, held this month in Makuhari, near Tokyo.

This development follows Trump unnerving US allies worldwide by questioning Washington’s commitment to common defense.

Company representatives attending the three-day International Defence and Security Equipment Japan (DSEI) fair stated that Japanese politicians and officials have made it clear they are now more open to deals with companies outside the US, supported by plans to significantly increase national defense spending.

Lars Eriksson, Saab’s country manager for Japan, said, “In the past, this area was dominated by the US. But recently, doors have opened for other countries to take a larger slice of the pie.”

Paul MacGregor, managing director of the British sensor and information defense group Roke, also noted a change in Japan, indicating a sentiment among Japanese officials of “we love anything as long as it’s not American-made.”

Roke, owned by the UK-listed Chemring, supplied electronic warfare systems to Japan’s Self-Defense Forces for the first time last year and hopes to generate £100 million in revenue from the Japanese market over the next five years by expanding its relationship with local trading company Kaigai.

British, Italian, Scandinavian, Israeli, and German defense manufacturers echoed MacGregor’s enthusiasm, stating that the domestic arms market has completely changed following the war in Ukraine.

The war increased Tokyo’s awareness of “geopolitical uncertainties” and convinced policymakers to take more precautions against what they see as the strategic threat of an increasingly powerful and assertive China.

In 2023, Japan announced plans to increase its defense spending limit from approximately 1% of GDP, a level maintained since the 1960s, to 2% by 2027.

As a sign of the changing commercial landscape, 471 companies from 33 countries participated in the DSEI trade fair. This number represents an increase of over 60% compared to the previous event in 2023. Of these, 128 came from Europe, marking the largest participation to date.

James de St John-Pryce, business director for British armored vehicle manufacturer NMS UK, commented, “While Japan has hitherto had a much more US-centric approach, it now seems far more open to what the UK, Europe, and broader international allies have to offer. Amid mixed messages from the US, mutual cooperation between the UK and Japan has become much more meaningful.”

Robert Dane, CEO of Australian uncrewed marine vessel supplier Ocius, said that his company’s talks to supply the Japanese navy have “defied expectations since last October by moving at lightning speed.”

Dane added, “We were told this was going to take six years and involve a lot of sake.”

In a speech at the fair on Thursday, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba emphasized Japan’s inclination to open up to deeper partnerships with missile, drone, and fighter jet manufacturers.

Ishiba stated, “To ensure the peace and stability of Japan and the wider region, it is extremely important to promote cooperation in the transfer, joint development, and production of defense equipment.”

Japan’s most significant military collaboration is the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), a multi-billion dollar fighter jet project with the United Kingdom and Italy. The explicit aim of this program is to find state-of-the-art alternatives to US military technologies, which are often kept secret.

Andrew Howard, Future Combat Air director at Leonardo UK, one of four companies that will supply avionics systems for the fighter jet, added, “The essence of the GCAP program is freedom of action and freedom to modify for each nation. The desire to retain significant sovereign capabilities in each of the three nations… is reinforced by concerns over US behavior.”

The Trump administration is trying to alleviate Asian allies’ concerns about its commitment. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who visited Japan at the end of March, praised Japan as an “exemplary ally” and said Washington and Tokyo were beginning to establish a “war headquarters.”

Hegseth noted that “America First” does not mean “America alone.”

In this context, attendees at the defense fair agreed that even if supply and joint development activities with Europe increase significantly, the US will remain Japan’s primary defense partner and supplier.

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) based on its sources, United States (US) President Donald Trump is considering imposing new sanctions on Moscow this week.

The report also stated that Trump is considering withdrawing from the negotiation process for resolving the conflict in Ukraine if “a final effort” does not yield results.

It was noted that these potential steps by Trump are a response to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s actions in Ukraine and the lack of progress in peace talks.

Sources speaking to WSJ indicated that potential new restrictions would likely not include banking sanctions and that various options are being discussed.

However, it was also mentioned that there is a possibility Trump might not increase pressure on Russia.

President Trump stated the other day that he was “definitely” considering the possibility of imposing sanctions against Russia.

Trump attributed this situation to President Vladimir Putin “being completely crazy” and “unnecessarily killing a lot of people” in Ukraine.

Trump used the expressions, “I always said that he (Putin) wants not just a part of Ukraine, but all of it, and perhaps this is being confirmed, but if he takes it, it will lead to Russia’s downfall!”

White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt, commenting on the matter to WSJ, said, “President Trump has clearly stated that he wants to make a peace agreement through negotiations. President Trump also prudently kept all options open.”

A report regarding Trump’s possible exit from the negotiation process also appeared in The New York Times (NYT).

Sources speaking to NYT shared details of a conversation Trump had on May 19 with leaders from Germany, France, Italy, Finland, and European Commission officials, which took place after a phone call between Trump and Putin.

According to these sources, during his meeting with European leaders, the American president clearly stated that he would not increase sanctions pressure on Russia.

A source for NYT conveyed Trump’s stance with the words, “Actually, he said, ‘I am withdrawing [from the conflict resolution process].'” The source noted that this aligns with Vice President J.D. Vance’s statement that the US is “more than ready to leave.”

Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitriy Peskov, responding to Trump’s remarks about Putin, thanked the US for its mediation efforts.

Peskov stated, “This is a very sensitive moment, certainly an emotional overload for everyone and connected with emotional reactions. We are carefully monitoring all reactions.”