Latest news with #US government
Bloomberg
6 days ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Roche May Sell Drugs Directly to US Patients to Bypass Middlemen
Roche Holding AG is weighing direct-to-patient drug sales in the US, bypassing the middleman for its pricey medicines for multiple sclerosis, eye disease and cancer. The Swiss drugmaker has discussed direct-to-patient sales with the US government, Chief Executive Officer Thomas Schinecker said on Thursday as the company reported quarterly earnings. The move would bring down costs 'quite quickly,' he said.
Zawya
7 days ago
- Business
- Zawya
Africa's minerals are being bartered for security: why it's a bad idea?
A US-brokered peace deal between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda binds the two African nations to a worrying arrangement: one where a country signs away its mineral resources to a superpower in return for opaque assurances of security. The peace deal, signed in June 2025, aims to end three decades of conflict between the DRC and Rwanda. A key part of the agreement binds both nations to developing a regional economic integration framework. This arrangement would expand cooperation between the two states, the US government and American investors on 'transparent, formalized end-to-end mineral chains'. Despite its immense mineral wealth, the DRC is among the five poorest countries in the world. It has been seeking US investment in its mineral sector. The US has in turn touted a potential multi-billion-dollar investment programme to anchor its mineral supply chains in the traumatised and poor territory. The peace that the June 2025 deal promises, therefore, hinges on chaining mineral supply to the US in exchange for Washington's powerful – but vaguely formulated – military oversight. The peace agreement further establishes a joint oversight committee – with representatives from the African Union, Qatar and the US – to receive complaints and resolve disputes between the DRC and Rwanda. But beyond the joint oversight committee, the peace deal creates no specific security obligations for the US. The relationship between the DRC and Rwanda has been marred by war and tension since the bloody First (1996-1997) and Second (1998-2003) Congo wars. At the heart of much of this conflict is the DRC's mineral wealth. It has fuelled competition, exploitation and armed violence. This latest peace deal introduces a resources-for-security arrangement. Such deals aren't new in Africa. They first emerged in the early 2000s as resources-for-infrastructure transactions. Here, a foreign state would agree to build economic and social infrastructure (roads, ports, airports, hospitals) in an African state. In exchange, it would get a major stake in a government-owned mining company. Or gain preferential access to the host country's minerals. We have studied mineral law and governance in Africa for more than 20 years. The question that emerges now is whether a US-brokered resources-for-security agreement will help the DRC benefit from its resources. Based on our research on mining, development and sustainability, we believe this is unlikely. This is because resources-for-security is the latest version of a resource-bartering approach that China and Russia pioneered in countries such as Angola, the Central African Republic and the DRC. Resource bartering in Africa has eroded the sovereignty and bargaining power of mineral-rich nations such as the DRC and Angola. Further, resources-for-security deals are less transparent and more complicated than prior resource bartering agreements. DRC's security gaps The DRC is endowed with major deposits of critical minerals like cobalt, copper, lithium, manganese and tantalum. These are the building blocks for 21st century technologies: artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, wind energy and military security hardware. Rwanda has less mineral wealth than its neighbour, but is the world's third-largest producer of tantalum, used in electronics, aerospace and medical devices. For almost 30 years, minerals have fuelled conflict and severe violence, especially in eastern DRC. Tungsten, tantalum and gold (referred to as 3TG) finance and drive conflict as government forces and an estimated 130 armed groups vie for control over lucrative mining sites. Several reports and studies have implicated the DRC's neighbours – Rwanda and Uganda – in supporting the illegal extraction of 3TG in this region. The DRC government has failed to extend security over its vast (2.3 million square kilometres) and diverse territory (109 million people, representing 250 ethnic groups). Limited resources, logistical challenges and corruption have weakened its armed forces. This context makes the United States' military backing enormously attractive. But our research shows there are traps. What states risk losing Resources-for-infrastructure and resources-for-security deals generally offer African nations short-term stability, financing or global goodwill. However, the costs are often long-term because of an erosion of sovereign control. Here's how this happens: - certain clauses in such contracts can freeze future regulatory reforms, limiting legislative autonomy - other clauses may lock in low prices for years, leaving resource-selling states unable to benefit when commodity prices surge - arbitration clauses often shift disputes to international forums, bypassing local courts - infrastructure loans are often secured via resource revenues used as loan security. This effectively ringfences exports and undermines sovereign fiscal control. Examples of loss or near-loss of sovereignty from these sorts of deals abound in Africa. For instance, Angola's US$2 billion oil-backed loan from China Eximbank in 2004. This was repayable in monthly deliveries of oil, with revenues directed to Chinese-controlled accounts. The loan's design deprived Angolan authorities of decision-making power over that income stream even before the oil was extracted. These deals also fragment accountability. They often span multiple ministries (such as defence, mining and trade), avoiding robust oversight or accountability. Fragmentation makes resource sectors vulnerable to elite capture. Powerful insiders can manipulate agreements for private gain. In the DRC, this has created a violent kleptocracy, where resource wealth is systematically diverted away from popular benefit. Finally, there is the risk of re-entrenching extractive trauma. Communities displaced for mining and environmental degradation in many countries across Africa illustrate the long-standing harm to livelihoods, health and social cohesion. These are not new problems. But where extraction is tied to security or infrastructure, such damage risks becoming permanent features, not temporary costs. What needs to change Critical minerals are 'critical' because they're hard to mine or substitute. Additionally, their supply chains are strategically vulnerable and politically exposed. Whoever controls these minerals controls the future. Africa must make sure it doesn't trade that future away. In a world being reshaped by global interests in critical minerals, African states must not underestimate the strategic value of their mineral resources. They hold considerable leverage. But leverage only works if it is wielded strategically. This means: - investing in institutional strength and legal capacity to negotiate better deals - demanding local value creation and addition - requiring transparency and parliamentary oversight for minerals-related agreements - refusing deals that bypass human rights, environmental or sovereignty standards. Africa has the resources. It must hold on to the power they wield. All rights reserved. © 2022. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (
NHK
7 days ago
- Politics
- NHK
July 23 NEWSROOM TOKYO Bangkok Live
Lineup: 1. US, Philippines reach trade deal 2. 31 dead in Bangladesh fighter jet crash into school 3. Over 200,000 people living in tents, shelters
Yahoo
20-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Brazil's president warns of retaliation after Trump unveils 50 percent tariffs
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva warned on Wednesday that his government is prepared to retaliate after President Trump announced plans to impose 50 percent tariffs on goods imported from his country. In a statement posted to the social platform X, the Brazilian leader pushed back on 'inaccurate' claims of a U.S. trade deficit in its commercial relationship with Brazil, saying, 'Statistics from the U.S. government itself show a surplus of $410 billion in the trade of goods and services with Brazil over the past 15 years.' 'Therefore, any unilateral tariff increases will be addressed in accordance with Brazil's Economic Reciprocity Law,' Lula continued in the statement. 'Sovereignty, respect and the unwavering defense of the interests of the Brazilian people are the values that guide our relationship with the world,' he added. The Economic Reciprocity Law was signed into law April 14, shortly after Trump announced his sweeping tariffs on numerous countries. The government cited Trump's tariffs as the impetus for the law. The law authorizes the legislative branch to 'adopt countermeasures in the form of restrictions to the importation of goods and services or measures to suspend concessions in the areas of trade, investments, and obligations related to intellectual property rights, as well as measures to suspend other obligations foreseen in any of the country's trade agreements.' Lula's statement comes after Trump announced Wednesday the 50 percent tariff on all goods from Brazil, citing the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro over an alleged plot to remain in power after losing an election. Trump, who has criticized Brazil's treatment of Bolsonaro in recent days, said in a letter to Lula that the new tariffs would take effect Aug. 1 and are 'due in part to Brazil's insidious attacks on Free Elections and the fundamental Free Speech Rights of Americans.' Trump also cited Brazil's 'Tariff, and Non-Tariff, Policies and Trade Barriers.' 'The way that Brazil has treated former President Bolsonaro, a Highly Respected Leader throughout the World during his Term, including by the United States, is an international disgrace. This Trial should not be taking place. It is a Witch Hunt that should end IMMEDIATELY!' Trump wrote in the letter, which was posted to the president's Truth Social platform. Lula, in his statement late Wednesday, defended the independence of his country's institutions, saying, 'Brazil is a sovereign nation with independent institutions and will not accept any form of tutelage.' 'The judicial proceedings against those responsible for planning the coup d'état fall exclusively under the jurisdiction of Brazil's Judicial Branch and, as such, are not subject to any interference or threats that could compromise the independence of national institutions,' Lula continued. Lula also warned that digital companies must reject 'hateful content' and anti-democratic speech on their platforms if they want to continue operating in Brazil. 'In the context of digital platforms, Brazilian society rejects hateful content, racism, child pornography, scams, fraud, and speeches against human rights and democratic freedom,' he wrote. 'In Brazil, freedom of expression must not be confused with aggression or violent practices. All companies—whether domestic or foreign—must comply with Brazilian law in order to operate within our territory.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
The National
16-07-2025
- Politics
- The National
UN refugee agency forced to make cuts as Syrians try to return home, top official says
The UN's refugee agency has been forced to slash services just as it needs to increase operations to help Syrians return home, a top official said on Wednesday. With governments around the globe diverting money from aid to security and defence, the UNHCR is having to make cuts in the Middle East, including in Lebanon where it has stopped providing educational services to refugee children. A 'historic opportunity for people to stop being refugees unfortunately comes at the same time that we've had a dramatic series of cuts to the humanitarian aid system around the world,' said Rema Jamous Imseis, the Middle East and North Africa regional director for the UNHCR. She told reporters in Washington that Syria and the region are at a 'pivotal moment' and called on the US government to provide additional support for refugee assistance, and to countries that are hosting large numbers of Syrians. The agency said it urgently needs at least $370 million to fund programmes for the return and reintegration of Syrians, and another $575 million for this year's return support plan. More than two million Syrians have returned home since the end of the civil war in December, including 650,000 refugees and more than 1.5 million internally displaced people. Refugees returning to Syria face enormous challenges. About 80 per cent of homes are either fully or partially destroyed, according to the UNHCR. 'The basic necessities of life simply don't exist,' Ms Jamous Imseis said. 'We need the international community support to help reinforce and consolidate what's there and further expand to meet the needs of all of these people who want to return home.' Syria is undergoing new turmoil that threatens the promise of stability by the new government of President Ahmad Al Shara. Israel bombed Damascus on Wednesday in response to Syrian attacks on the Druze minority community in the south.
