U.S. Prioritizes Gulf Investment as Strategic Capital Flows Gain Traction

Economic

Summary:

The U.S. Treasury has launched a new fast-track investment process for allied nations, including Gulf states, signaling a shift toward preferential capital treatment as Washington seeks to attract strategic funding...

Streamlining Gulf Investment Amid AI and Infrastructure Ambitions

Just days ahead of President Donald Trump’s diplomatic visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, the U.S. government has unveiled a “priority” investment channel targeting strategic allies—especially wealthy Gulf nations that collectively manage nearly 40% of global sovereign wealth fund assets.

A centerpiece of this shift is a new digital investment portal announced by the U.S. Treasury on May 8. Through this platform, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) will begin pre-screening foreign investors before they formally file investment proposals. This system aims to reduce procedural delays and streamline approvals for vetted allied investors, particularly those from countries deemed non-threatening to U.S. national interests.

Geopolitical Calculations Shape Investment Access

This investment fast lane reflects deeper geopolitical dynamics. With UAE pledging $1.4 trillion in U.S. investments over the next decade—and Saudi Arabia promising $600 billion in just four years—the Biden administration (under Trump’s continuity) is positioning America as the premier destination for Gulf capital. Much of this funding is earmarked for critical sectors such as artificial intelligence, semiconductor technology, and green infrastructure.

In particular, the UAE has aggressively courted U.S. tech partnerships, distancing itself from Chinese platforms and seeking better access to American-made advanced chips, including from leaders like Nvidia. Abu Dhabi has lobbied Washington for smoother regulatory engagement, emphasizing alignment with U.S. strategic interests and national security goals.

Balancing Open Investment with National Security Scrutiny

While facilitating Gulf investment, the Treasury remains committed to safeguarding U.S. security. Secretary Scott Bessent reaffirmed that the goal is not to dilute CFIUS’s oversight but to enhance efficiency without compromising scrutiny. Investments from adversarial nations, notably those linked to the Chinese government, will continue to face tight restrictions under Trump’s "America First Investment Policy" directive signed in February.

This dual-track approach creates a clear delineation between “trusted capital” from allied nations and “strategically sensitive” investments from geopolitical rivals. It also enables Washington to leverage economic diplomacy as a tool to reinforce alliances and shift global capital away from competitors like China.

Implications for U.S. Economic and Strategic Positioning

The Gulf states' eagerness to deepen economic ties with the U.S. is driven by a mix of security dependence, technological ambition, and portfolio diversification. Their sovereign wealth funds, flush with energy-derived capital, are now actively seeking exposure to high-growth sectors in stable jurisdictions—making the U.S. an ideal target.

President Trump’s upcoming visit is expected to solidify these intentions, with senior U.S. executives joining him to explore bilateral partnerships. While specific investment agreements may be finalized later, the groundwork being laid now signals a strategic recalibration of Gulf-U.S. economic relations under the lens of national interest and mutual security.

By easing bureaucratic hurdles and enhancing trust-based vetting, the U.S. is sending a clear signal: capital from allied nations—particularly the Gulf—is not only welcome but strategically prioritized. As geopolitical rivalry with China intensifies, the Biden-Trump axis is leveraging financial alignment as a new pillar of global influence.

Source: Arab News

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Cryptocurrency

Bitcoin Reclaims a Pivotal Price Level

At 8:05 AM (Vietnam time), Bitcoin briefly touched $105,032 according to Binance data—its highest point in over three months—before slipping back to $104,495 minutes later. Although this level is not an all-time high (which remains at $109,588), it holds symbolic significance for both short-term traders and long-term holders.

The $105,000 mark acts as a key psychological resistance zone. Market participants closely watch this level as a potential inflection point where market sentiment—driven by emotion rather than fundamentals—could shift decisively. Terms such as herd mentality, greed, fear, and hope are often associated with such zones, especially in volatile crypto environments.

Accumulation and Distribution Patterns Diverge

During the past week, over 30,000 BTC (worth over $3.13 billion) were accumulated, suggesting active buying by large players or institutions. However, technical data also shows that long-term holders—those who bought earlier at lower prices—have started to offload some of their positions, creating a tug-of-war between accumulation and distribution forces.

This divergence points to market uncertainty. Bulls see strength in accumulation volumes, while bears caution against the selling pressure from early investors who may view this as a profit-taking opportunity near a psychological ceiling.

Resistance and Support: A Market-Critical Battleground

The $105,000 level is not merely numerical—it has become a psychological battleground. Technical analysts emphasize that if Bitcoin convincingly breaks above and sustains this level, it could flip from resistance to support. Such a breakout would likely reignite momentum, potentially driving Bitcoin toward the next key target of $110,000.

Conversely, failure to breach and hold above $105,000 could lead to a retreat toward $100,000, which currently serves as the nearest support zone. Given the intensity of market speculation and recent volatility, both scenarios remain in play.

The recent price movement marks a pivotal phase in Bitcoin’s medium-term trajectory. While institutional interest and accumulation patterns support a bullish thesis, the psychological weight of the $105,000 level—compounded by long-term holders’ selling pressure—adds complexity to the outlook. Market participants are now watching whether Bitcoin can solidify its position above this threshold or fall back into its prior range.

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

China–U.S. Trade War

Economic

Turning Point in Fiscal Policy and Economic Governance

China’s 2025 "Two Sessions" marked a clear pivot in the country’s economic strategy. The Chinese government is departing from its long-standing fiscal discipline—traditionally anchored to a 3% GDP deficit cap—and embracing a more assertive stance by raising the fiscal deficit to 4% of GDP, the highest in modern Chinese history. This bold move is aimed at reviving domestic demand and stabilizing financial markets amid intensifying geopolitical risks and faltering global trade.

Central to this pivot is the Communist Party’s renewed emphasis on state-led interventions in real estate and equity markets, sectors seen as crucial to macroeconomic and social stability. By loosening fiscal constraints, Beijing signals a preference for growth-oriented state activism over austerity—a reflection of its political commitment to manage both economic momentum and internal cohesion.

Stabilization Funds and Market Intervention

Prominent proposals during the legislative sessions came from National People's Congress delegate and businessman Liu Hanyuan. He advocated for two RMB 10 trillion (USD 1.37 trillion) stabilization funds—one to shore up China’s stock market, and another to resolve real estate overhangs by absorbing unsold properties and preventing developer defaults.

These proposed mega-funds represent a proactive effort to reduce systemic risk and avoid spillover crises. They signal that Beijing is prepared to take aggressive financial actions, akin to crisis containment strategies seen in the post-2008 West, but tailored to the hybrid model of a party-led economy.

Stimulating Domestic Consumption: Short-Term Boost, Long-Term Shift

Beyond market interventions, China’s policy shift places household consumption at the center of growth. Initiatives such as consumer subsidies for electric vehicles, household appliances, and green technologies are designed to kick-start demand in the short term.

However, the long-term transformation depends on structural reforms to boost disposable income—particularly through enhanced social welfare, pensions, and public healthcare systems. By improving the social safety net, China aims to reduce precautionary savings and channel household income into sustained spending, thereby reducing the economy’s reliance on infrastructure-led expansion.

Foreign Policy Recalibration and Strategic Economic Partnerships

This domestic reorientation aligns with a broader recalibration of China’s foreign policy. The country is increasingly engaging with Global South partners to diversify trade relationships and bypass U.S.-centric financial channels. It is also promoting renminbi-denominated trade as a strategic hedge against Western financial dominance.

China’s growing presence in Saudi Arabia—having invested USD 21.6 billion between 2021 and 2024, one-third of which went into clean technology—highlights its role in global energy transition and digital infrastructure. This aligns with its domestic strategy to develop green industries and become a leader in digital and low-carbon technologies.

China is also ramping up exports of electric vehicles and solar panels to African nations, using green technology as both an economic and diplomatic tool to reshape global value chains and project itself as a champion of sustainable development.

Risks of Economic Decoupling and Strategic Tensions

While these moves enhance China’s strategic autonomy, they also increase the risk of prolonged economic decoupling from the United States. Beijing’s push for renminbi trade, supply chain realignment, and new investment blocs may further fragment the global economy, especially as tensions with Washington persist.

President Xi Jinping’s recent visits to Southeast Asia underscore this multidimensional strategy. China seeks to deepen regional alliances while simultaneously hedging against external shocks—be it tariffs, sanctions, or financial exclusion—thereby preparing for a new era of economic geopolitics.

China’s economic pivot marks a deliberate attempt to redefine growth within its borders while repositioning itself globally. The success of this transformation hinges on its ability to maintain domestic financial stability, elevate consumer demand, and build resilient external partnerships—all while managing the risks of geopolitical fragmentation and potential global economic bifurcation.

Source: AInvest

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Slow Uptake of Mobile Salary Payments

Two years after the Japanese government approved electronic salary payment through applications such as PayPay, adoption rates remain remarkably low. According to a survey by MMD Labo, only 2.8% of respondents aged 18 to 69 reported receiving wages via mobile apps.

This tepid response comes despite Japan’s broader push toward a cashless society. More than 100 companies have rolled out the app-based salary disbursement model, but it has yet to gain meaningful traction among workers or employers.

Trust and Perceived Value Limit Adoption

One of the primary barriers appears to be the perceived lack of benefit. Nearly half of those disinterested in mobile wage payments indicated they simply did not see the need for such a system. In a separate government-commissioned survey of 10,000 participants, one-third outright rejected the idea, citing concerns ranging from privacy to unfamiliarity with the platforms.

Experts suggest that in order for app-based payroll solutions to become mainstream, employers must better communicate practical advantages such as speed, convenience, and integration with broader digital financial services. Currently, the benefits remain abstract for many Japanese workers accustomed to conventional banking channels.

Full-Time Employees Dominate the Program

Another structural limitation lies in the program's target demographic. Most electronic salary payments are offered only to full-time employees, leaving out part-time and gig workers—who are statistically more likely to prefer rapid or flexible payment systems.

Ironically, it is this excluded group—part-time and temporary staff—that could benefit most from instant app-based transfers. Without structural adjustments to widen eligibility and support flexible disbursement, the program’s relevance may remain limited.

Corporate Reluctance Adds to the Challenge

Employers, too, appear hesitant. A government survey involving roughly 2,300 companies showed that nearly 80% had no plans to introduce app-based salary options. Most cited procedural difficulties, lack of demand from employees, and potential administrative complexity.

Firms must also obtain explicit employee consent before switching to app-based disbursement, further complicating the shift. Without a compelling business case or regulatory incentive, most companies find little reason to change existing systems.

While Japan has made progress in digital payments in retail and personal finance, mobile salary payments remain a cultural and logistical leap. The reluctance among workers and companies alike underscores how deeply rooted habits, trust, and perceived necessity can influence the pace of technological adoption—even in one of the world’s most advanced economies.

Source: Kyodo News

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Swift Fiscal Action to Stabilize Domestic Economy

In response to heightened global trade uncertainty, notably triggered by U.S. tariff expansions, the South Korean government is deploying an aggressive fiscal support package. The Ministry of Finance and Economy (MOEF) confirmed it will accelerate disbursement of 70% of the supplementary budget—amounting to 9.66 trillion won—within the next three months.

This rapid fiscal rollout was announced during an economic strategy meeting between key cabinet ministers, where officials emphasized the importance of timing in enhancing policy effectiveness. By ensuring funds reach businesses and households quickly, the government hopes to buffer external shocks and stimulate domestic demand.

Dual-Track Support for Exporters and Microbusinesses

The budget includes targeted allocations for both export-driven firms and vulnerable microbusinesses. Approximately 400 billion won is earmarked for issuing discount vouchers to stimulate small retail businesses. Another 89.8 billion won will be used to distribute export support coupons to companies adversely affected by rising trade protectionism and shifting global supply chains.

Exporters will be eligible to utilize these support vouchers starting in June. The initiative is designed to offset rising logistics and compliance costs associated with global tariff disputes, including those originating from recent U.S. trade measures.

Meanwhile, beginning in July, small business owners—particularly in sectors with thin margins and high fixed costs—will receive direct financial assistance of up to 500,000 won each. This aid is intended to cover essential expenses such as utility bills and insurance premiums, reducing immediate cash flow pressure and preventing closures.

Policy Response to External Trade Headwinds

This policy maneuver comes amid growing fears that escalating protectionism—especially from the U.S.—could undermine South Korea’s export-led growth model. With the Korean won facing volatility and global demand becoming uneven, export-dependent SMEs have struggled with squeezed margins and delayed payments.

The supplementary budget is South Korea’s fiscal response to restore momentum in critical sectors, particularly as trade with traditional partners becomes less predictable. While short-term, the government’s plan seeks to create breathing space for domestic producers to adjust their strategies in the evolving global environment.

A Tactical Boost for Resilience

South Korea’s move to inject liquidity into export and microenterprise sectors underscores its commitment to proactive economic stabilization. By pre-empting the adverse effects of global tariff shifts and energy costs, the government is not only attempting to secure economic resilience but also maintain public trust in fiscal responsiveness.

Whether the support measures translate into lasting growth will depend on external trade developments and the ability of local firms to reconfigure their operations in a more protectionist global economy.

Source: The Korea Times

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Catherine Richards

Political

Opinions are mixed about who came out on top in the latest Indo-Pak conflict, but one thing is for certain, and it's that India's new doctrine is the lasting takeaway.

According to reports, India will regard all future acts of terrorism as acts of war by Pakistan, which will result in cross-border strikes.

That might not deter Pakistan, whose military leadership relies on the unresolved Kashmir Conflict to legitimize its outsized influence, but it could still make them think twice about orchestrating future attacks.

Moreover, the Indus Waters Treaty remains suspended despite the fragile ceasefire/”understanding” between them, which collectively contributes to the new reality in South Asia. Reports also suggest that it was Pakistan, not India, which asked the US to diplomatically intervene in the latest conflict. About that, India denied that any mediation took place despite the US’ claims, but the US probably passed along messages from Pakistan to India on Islamabad's behalf during talks between their officials.

CNN claimed that Vance called Modi after receiving “alarming intelligence”, which hints that Pakistan told the US that it might use of nuclear weapons in desperation, likely due to India bombing multiple bases across the country. If that's indeed what happened, then it would imply that Pakistan believed that was losing, thus lending credence to perceptions that India got the best of it. After all, the aforesaid strikes weren't intercepted, which shows that India achieved escalatory dominance over Pakistan.

Although some Pakistani drones and missiles hit targets inside of India, Russia's S-400s were praised by national media for neutralizing many of the incoming attacks. Likewise, the jointly produced BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles were used in India's successful attacks against Pakistani bases, thus proving that Russian military equipment is truly some of the best in the world. By contrast, Pakistan's mostly Chinese equipment fell short of some observers' lofty expectations, which reflects negatively on both.

Nevertheless, many in the Alt-Media Community – including some top “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” – insist that Pakistan defeated India, though there are reasons to suspect that they don't actually believe this but are driven by ulterior motives in claiming otherwise. Most of these same figures are known for their support of Palestine and/or China, and given that India is close to Israel and at odds with China, supporting Pakistan is “ideologically consistent” with their views and precludes accusations of hypocrisy.

No matter how reliable their takes on Ukraine, Palestine, and whatever else might be, their views on the latest Indo-Pak conflict should therefore be taken with lots of salt. This is important to keep in mind since Putin and Modi “emphasised the need to uncompromisingly fight terrorism in all its forms” during their call last week, which isn't reflected by these top “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” who present themselves as interpreters of Russian foreign policy.

Their support of Pakistan over India contradicts Russian interests.

All told, while opinions are mixed about who came out on top in the latest Indo-Pak conflict, India arguably won seeing as how it punished Pakistan for the Pahalgam terrorist attack by bombing multiple bases, the Indus Waters Treaty remains suspended, and a new military doctrine has entered into effect. Pakistan achieved no comparable outcomes despite its supporters' claims. Even though it lost, Pakistan might not have learned its lesson, so a re-eruption of hostilities at some future time can't be ruled out.

Source: Zero Hedge

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Tariffs Present India with a Unique Market Opening

India’s textile industry is at the heart of a global supply chain realignment catalyzed by Washington’s aggressive tariff measures. As President Trump prepares to impose a 26% tariff on Indian textile and apparel products starting July—significantly lower than the 37% for Bangladesh and 145% for China—India is emerging as an increasingly attractive supplier for U.S. importers.

According to 2024 U.S. textile import data, adjusted post-tariff export prices place India’s apparel at $4.31/m²—comparable to Bangladesh at $4.24/m² and more competitive than China at $4.35/m². This narrow price gap signals India’s strengthened appeal in the tariff era.

Retail giants such as Walmart and Costco are actively diversifying their supplier base, with India gaining prominence. A survey by the U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA) in 2024 found nearly 60% of U.S. brands plan to expand sourcing from India. This trend aligns with broader geopolitical risk aversion and the gradual move away from China-dependent supply chains.

Shipping data further reinforces India’s rise. Between April 2 and May 4, Walmart imported over 1,100 containers of garments and household goods from India—nearly twice the volume from the same period last year. Given that the U.S. accounts for 28% of India’s $36 billion in annual textile exports, these dynamics could reshape the sector’s trajectory.

Structural Barriers Threaten to Derail Momentum

Despite favorable trade winds, India’s textile sector is constrained by deep-rooted inefficiencies. Labor shortage is the most critical bottleneck. In Tiruppur—India’s knitwear hub with over one million workers—the industry still needs at least 100,000 additional employees to meet demand, according to the Tiruppur Exporters’ Association.

Many firms report idle production lines due to the lack of skilled labor. Workers often leave larger factories for smaller, informal setups offering more overtime and higher pay. This movement undermines training efforts and affects product consistency, making it difficult to meet international labor standards and cost expectations simultaneously.

Moreover, over 90% of India’s labor force is employed in the informal sector. This reality complicates Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “Make in India” campaign, especially in labor-intensive industries like textiles that demand scale, regulation, and consistency.

Capacity Limitations and Cost Pressures Persist

India’s textile enterprises also struggle with production scale. Whereas the average factory in Bangladesh employs over 1,200 workers, Indian facilities often range between 600–800. In Tiruppur, just 100 exporters contribute half of the region’s $5 billion in annual exports, with the rest coming from thousands of fragmented smaller players—highlighting the sector’s lack of consolidation.

Operational costs also weigh heavily. Labor costs in India average $180 per month—far higher than Bangladesh’s $139. Regulatory compliance related to overtime and shift limits further drives up expenses, reducing India’s price competitiveness.

American buyers are increasingly price-sensitive. Suppliers report pressure from U.S. clients demanding pricing parity with Bangladesh, regardless of India’s higher costs. Without a significant reduction in unit costs or productivity improvements, India’s long-term ability to capture market share remains uncertain.

As Mahesh Kumar Jegadeesan of Balu Exports noted, U.S. retailers will only shift orders to India if it matches Bangladesh’s pricing. Raft Garments’ CEO echoed this concern, stating that pricing remains the biggest hurdle, even with a surge of inquiries from new clients.

Bangladesh Remains a Key Competitor Despite Tariffs

While political unrest and rising tariffs are affecting Bangladesh’s reputation, it continues to hold ground due to its mature infrastructure, consistent quality, and economies of scale. According to Anwar-ul-Alam Chowdhury of Dhaka-based Evince Group, American buyers remain loyal due to lower costs and delivery reliability.

For India, this underscores that tariff advantage alone does not equate to market dominance. Unless India addresses productivity bottlenecks and narrows the cost gap, it may struggle to convert its current opportunity into sustainable growth.

India stands at a crossroads: a rare tariff-induced opportunity could help it displace traditional textile giants, but only if longstanding issues around labor, scale, and cost are systematically resolved. As global supply chains rebalance and protectionism reshapes trade, India’s challenge will be to align internal capacity with external demand.