News related to
global

Riyadh is advancing its push into artificial intelligence, sidestepping some of the previous fanfare around the massive urban-megaproject Neom, and signalling a new strategic pivot by its sovereign wealth arm Public Investment Fund. The fund is repositioning to attract global AI investment, deepen partnerships with major tech players and harness data-centre infrastructure at scale.

The kingdom’s leadership is steering resources away from grand construction ambitions to technology-driven growth. The newly formed Humain — a PIF-backed AI company — was launched in May with the mission of establishing Saudi Arabia as a global hub for AI. The firm plans to build advanced data centres, cloud services and one of the world’s most powerful Arabic large-language models.

Strategic deals have followed. U. S. chip-maker Nvidia has agreed to ship some 18,000 Blackwell chips to Saudi Arabia to support a 500-megawatt data-centre facility coordinated by Humain. PIF and international analysts say the move reflects a shift in focus: less emphasis on sprawling “giga-projects” of construction, more on the digital-infrastructure layer that underpins a future knowledge-economy.

Globally, transformative AI applications — from generative-AI language models to edge computing in industries — require vast compute power, energy and state coordination. PIF’s governor Yasir Al‑Rumayyan has said the kingdom is well-placed, given its energy resources and large-scale capital, to become a “hub outside the U. S.” for AI development. Analysts suggest the pivot acknowledges market realities: mega-cities like Neom have proved slower to materialise than envisaged, while digital-economy bets offer faster, more measurable returns.

The megacity Neom and its flagship component – The Line – have faced scepticism over timelines, cost-overruns and foreign investor pull-back. Executive reshuffles in Neom’s leadership and recalibrated investment priorities have signalled the shift. Meanwhile, PIF has begun trimming the proportion of its portfolio allocated to global investments — moving foreign-allocation toward 18 per cent from previous targets — to double-down on domestic strategic sectors like AI.

The investment case for Saudi Arabia is sizeable. Humain aims to tap into the Arab-language market of over 450 million people, while deploying data-centre capacity measured in gigawatts. Academic and industry voices say the kingdom has already built one of the strongest AI-ready physical infrastructures in the Middle East: multiple super-computers, data centres and training programmes are in motion. On the human-capital front, programmes to train 20,000 data/AI experts by 2030 are underway through partnerships with international firms such as Microsoft, Accenture and Huawei Technologies.

For global tech firms and investors, Saudi Arabia’s offer now centres around “sovereign AI infrastructure” rather than purely construction or real-estate play. The deal with Nvidia is seen as precedent-setting: Nvidia’s CEO told reporters that AI infrastructure is “essential infrastructure” akin to power and internet. Moreover, the shift aligns with the kingdom’s broader strategic framework Vision 2030 — which seeks to reduce oil-dependence and build a diversified economy.

Nevertheless, risks remain. Observers caution that the AI ambition is spectacular in scale yet faces operational and regulatory challenges — from data-governance to talent retention and ideological scrutiny. The push may also attract geopolitical scrutiny given the involvement of U. S. technology in Saudi infrastructure. The earlier mega-project model illustrates how bold vision can be slowed by delivery hurdles.

Moscow has authorised the use of cryptocurrencies in cross-border payments for trade, marking a significant departure from previous policy. The Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation and the Bank of Russia have reached an agreement to legalise digital-asset settlements in foreign trade transactions, while simultaneously tightening regulatory oversight of the wider crypto market.

Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said the step was necessary because imports are already being paid for with crypto assets and the existing regulatory framework was inadequate. He emphasised that the legalisation would be accompanied by “proper legislative regulation” to restore order in the sector.

Under the new framework, firms engaged in exports and imports will be able to transact using cryptocurrencies—but only via authorised channels that meet stringent anti-money-laundering and know-your-customer standards. The shift builds on an earlier “experimental legal regime” that allowed limited crypto use in foreign trade and by select investors.

The Bank of Russia remains cautious. Its governor Elvira Nabiullina continues to resist full recognition of cryptocurrencies as a means of payment domestically, and proposed restricting use to cross-border trade and wealthy “qualified” investors under licensed firms.

Market analysts interpret the decision in the context of pressures from Western sanctions, which have constrained access to global payment systems. The move is seen as part of Russia’s strategy to bolster trade flows, particularly in energy and commodities, by bypassing traditional channels.

Still, legalisation is selective rather than broad. The regime applies for now only to foreign-trade transactions; the domestic use of cryptocurrency for everyday payments or retail investments remains prohibited. The Bank of Russia argues allowing wide retail access poses “financial and social” risks.

For domestic investors, the path to broader engagement remains narrow. Earlier this year the regulator proposed allowing only those with assets above 100 million roubles or annual incomes above 50 million roubles to participate in a crypto-investment experiment.

Industry players say the legalisation will create new opportunities. Top banks—such as Sberbank and Alfa‑Bank—had warned that millions of Russians hold crypto assets despite being excluded from the formal regime. They argued the grey market status of holdings was a risk for the broader financial system.

Critics caution that regulatory oversight and enforcement will be key. The Prosecutor-General’s Office, under Alexander Gutsan, highlighted that the new framework includes tools to monitor transactions linked to corruption, terrorism, extremism, and illicit financial flows.

Observers outside Russia are weighing potential ripple effects. Some suggest the policy could encourage other sanctioned or emerging-market nations to adopt crypto-based trade settlement models, challenging the dominance of traditional systems such as SWIFT.

For Russian exporters and importers, the shift may offer relief from constrained access to Western-dominated financing and payment networks. Nonetheless, firms must still operate within Bank of Russia-endorsed platforms and are subject to rigorous compliance oversight—so adoption may remain cautious in the near term.

From the government’s perspective the move attempts to draw the large informal crypto-market inside the regulatory perimeter. Holding of crypto assets by Russian users has been estimated in the hundreds of billions of roubles, according to central bank data.

Global investment bank Goldman Sachs has secured the richest place in regional mergers and acquisitions activity in the Middle East and North Africa market, advising on 24 deals worth a combined US$104 billion in the first nine months of 2025, according to data from LSEG Deals Intelligence. The firm’s Co-head of Investment Banking for the Middle East & North Africa, Jassim AlSane, said the growth was driven by “national champions … with significant growth objectives” and government-backed strategies.

M&A volumes across the region have picked up substantially, supported by sovereign backing and major consolidation efforts. According to LSEG’s broader MENA investment banking review, M&A activity hit US$66.4 billion in the first quarter alone, illustrating a robust trajectory for the region. The strong performance underscores an increasingly active market for deals even amid global macro-economic headwinds.

Goldman’s dominance emerged as national-champion companies in the Gulf co-led big transactions. These firms often benefit from state support and predefined strategic mandates that accelerate investment decisions. AlSane highlighted that the top-10 deals for the firm in the region were “underpinned by an approved strategy” and “government-backed,” signalling a close alignment between private investment banks and states seeking large-scale diversification.

Key sectors powering the deal flow include energy-transition assets, infrastructure, and digital platforms. Observers note that the MENA region is embracing its role as a growth frontier for capital deployment, leveraging both private and sovereign funds to consolidate industries and build scale quickly. In particular, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates continue to push forward national frameworks that incentivise large transactions.

Despite the gains, the environment is not without uncertainty. Globally, deal volume has not uniformly increased — while deal value is up, the overall number of transactions in certain markets remains flat or declining. In the MENA context, some deals have faced delays or regulatory hurdles associated with cross‐border scrutiny and the need for state coordination. Critics argue that heavy reliance on government-backed mandates may reduce private-sector initiative and create hurdles in negotiation and valuation.

Goldman’s rise in the region also reflects wider trends in global investment banking. The firm posted a 42 per cent jump in investment-banking fees in the third quarter of 2025, citing advisory revenue jolts of 60 per cent year-on-year. While that data is global rather than specifically MENA-focused, it indicates that investment banking hunger for strategic transactions is rising and Goldman is benefiting. These elevated fee levels are the highest the firm has seen in years and point to a structural shift in deal-making dynamics.

Japan’s exports rose by 4.2 % in September compared with a year earlier, marking the first increase after five consecutive months of decline. The rebound was driven by a 12.6 % jump in shipments of semiconductors and electronic components as demand across Asia strengthened. Meanwhile shipments to the United States fell by 13.3 %, reflecting persistent tariff pressures.

The official data released by the Ministry of Finance show total export value reached ¥9.41 trillion, while imports rose 3.3 % to ¥9.65 trillion, resulting in a trade deficit of ¥234.6 billion. Economists had expected exports to climb about 4.4 %.

The shift in trade dynamics highlights Japan’s evolving export mix. Analysts attribute the up-turn primarily to regional technology supply-chain demand, particularly from China and other parts of Asia, where exports climbed by around 9.2 %. Shipments to mainland China rose approximately 5.8 %. By contrast, the United States market remained weak, hit by ongoing tariffs and cooling automotive exports.

Japan has been repositioning itself within the global semiconductor industry, capitalising on strengths in chip-making equipment and materials, even as it lags peers in logic-chip fabrication. According to the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office, Japanese firms still hold about 30 % of global equipment market share and roughly half of materials supply, although they are behind in advanced logic nodes.

With global demand shifting toward next-generation technologies such as artificial-intelligence servers and 5G infrastructure, Japan’s export engine appears to be realigning. The sharp rise in chip-related shipments suggests that Japanese firms are responding to increased regional tech investment and supply-chain diversification away from the US-China axis.

Japan’s auto industry remains under pressure, however. The drop in exports to the US was exacerbated by a 15 % tariff on Japanese autos imposed in July, which continues to dampen shipments to that key destination. This has left Japan reliant on growth elsewhere. Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, who took office amid this trade shift, sees the export data as an early boost; her government has pledged fiscal stimulus and monetary support to sustain momentum.

The export recovery still carries caveats. While the semiconductor and electronic component sectors are expanding, traditional export categories such as automobiles and machinery have not yet shown comparable strength. Imports rising faster than forecast reflect continuing underlying demand for energy and raw-material inputs, and the trade deficit underscores Japan’s ongoing reliance on external inputs despite the export uptick.

Japan’s export performance could indicate a structural shift rather than a temporary bounce. The country’s strategy to revive its chip industry through initiatives such as the Rapidus consortium and the Japan Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing venture illustrates a long-term push into advanced-node technologies and supply-chain resilience. These initiatives, supported by government subsidies targeting thousands of billions of yen, aim to re-establish Japan as a key node in advanced electronics manufacturing.

The Bank of England has committed to implementing a comprehensive regulatory framework for stablecoins by the end of 2026, signalling a significant shift in the United Kingdom’s approach to digital assets. According to government and central-bank sources, a formal consultation is scheduled for 10 November and the regulation is expected to align closely with forthcoming U. S. standards.

The framework will establish new standards for so-called “qualifying stablecoins” issued in the UK, stipulating full backing by secure liquid assets held in trust, mandatory redemption at par, and authorisation under the Financial Conduct Authority. For stablecoins deemed systemic—particularly those used for payments at scale—the BoE will assume additional supervisory and resolution responsibilities. The FCA’s Consultation Paper CP25/14 sets out much of this detail.

In public remarks, BoE Governor Andrew Bailey argued that widely-used stablecoins must be regulated in the same way as banks if they function as money-substitutes. He said they should access Bank accounts and adhere to depositor-protection regimes. The BoE itself has described the future payments landscape as one of “multi-money” — where tokenised deposits, central bank money and stablecoins coexist—provided the framework protects trust and financial stability.

The proposed regulatory timetable is part of a broader drive by UK authorities to maintain competitive positioning in global fintech, particularly as stablecoins gain traction in cross-border payments and tokenised-asset ecosystems. Industry experts note that the UK wants to keep pace with U. S. regulation to avoid regulatory arbitrage.

Under the current design, issuers of qualifying stablecoins will need authorisation by the FCA, must safeguard assets backing the coins by placing them in statutory trust arrangements, and maintain daily reconciliation between issued coins and backing assets. The consultation suggests a two-tier backing-asset regime: “core” assets and “expanded” assets subject to extra disclosure and modelling requirements.

From a technical infrastructure perspective, the BoE highlights that stablecoins may reduce the banking sector’s dominance over payments, but that the central bank must remain the settlement asset for systemically important markets. This position underpins the planned consultations and policy work around stablecoins’ role in the UK payments system.

Industry reaction is mixed. Some fintech firms and crypto-asset service providers welcome clarity, saying that clear rules reduce uncertainty and support investment. Others worry that too heavy or complex regulation might deter innovation or prevent start-ups from competing with global incumbents. One blog commentary described the framework as “a huge deal … but a nagging worry that too much focus on compliance might throw a wet blanket on the very innovation they are meant to encourage.”

The stakes are high for tokenised deposit initiatives within the UK banking system. Leading lenders including HSBC, NatWest Group and Lloyds Banking Group are pushing ahead with pilots of tokenised deposits through 2026. Regulators have been clear that although such deposits may be permitted within the current system, the stablecoin regulatory regime must take into account the potential threat of massive deposit flows leaving the banking sector.

One key tension lies in the setting of holding limits. The BoE has proposed initial caps on stablecoin holdings—for individuals perhaps in the order of £10,000 to £20,000—and higher for business entities, on the grounds that a swift migration out of bank deposits could undermine credit flows to households and firms. The caps would remain until the BoE is confident the stablecoin sector does not pose a systemic threat.

In this regulated-fork approach, oversight will be shared: The BoE will supervise systemic stablecoin issuers; the FCA will regulate non-systemic stablecoins and issuers under the regulated activities order. The Treasury has indicated that stablecoin issuance will not, for now, be brought directly into payment-services regulation.

The government of British Columbia has introduced legislation that would permanently ban new crypto-mining operations from connecting to the provincial grid via BC Hydro, and impose formal limits on power access for AI and data-centre operators. The bill, known as the Energy Statutes Amendment Act, aims to steer the province’s clean-electricity supply toward mining, LNG and natural-resource industries viewed as higher-priority than the high-load crypto sector.

Under the new framework, BC Hydro will no longer approve fresh power-grid connections for crypto-mining facilities. The moratorium first established in 2022 is now set to become law. In parallel, beginning in late 2025 the province will introduce an allocation process for electricity demanded by AI and data-centres: only a capped amount of power will be available to those sectors, and they must compete for it under stricter criteria.

Government officials say the shift reflects a need to address surging grid-demand from emerging industries and to ensure that public electricity resources deliver broad economic and employment benefits. Premier David Eby said the move will help the province “move faster” on major transmission infrastructure and support industrial growth in a planned megaproject in the northwest. Energy and Climate Solutions Minister Adrian Dix added: “Our new allocation framework will prioritise vital growth in sectors like mining, natural gas and lowest-emission LNG, while ensuring our clean energy is directed to projects that deliver the greatest benefit to British Columbians.”

The backdrop encompasses the looming construction of the North Coast Transmission Line, a roughly $6 billion project designed to bring new clean-electricity capacity to the province’s sparsely-electrified northwest. That infrastructure is central to the government’s strategy of prioritising industrial connections over speculative, high-load users such as crypto-mining farms.

Industry analysts have mixed reactions. Supporters say the policy reflects sound planning in a jurisdiction dependent on hydroelectric power and facing increasing pressure from multiple large-scale electricity users. They note that the high energy-intensity of crypto-mining—with relatively modest job creation and economic multiplier effects—makes it a less compelling candidate compared with mining, LNG, hydrogen and industrial AI. On the other hand, critics warn that the framework gives the government wide discretionary power, potentially reducing transparency and favouring incumbents. As one Green-party MLA noted: “With no detail on this framework or the criteria for decision-making in Bill 31, we are concerned that the minister will be the one making these consequential determinations under the influence of friends or lobbyists.”

The government has indicated that data-centres and AI firms will still be eligible for power, but will face competition under the new mechanism: for example, BC Hydro reportedly will allocate only about 300 megawatts for AI and 100 megawatts for data-centre use every two years. Those thresholds will represent a major scaling down in open-access grid connections for such technology users and signal a shift away from first-come, first-served power allocations.

For prospective crypto-miners, the measure marks a turning point. Major mining projects that had anticipated low-cost Canadian hydro power will face altered calculus: either repurpose for non-crypto uses, or relocate to jurisdictions with more open grid access. This may induce capital flight or slow the growth of a nascent mining industry in the province. Conversely, proponents of the policy argue it will preserve affordability for households and existing industrial users by preventing unmanaged load growth.

The government’s timing is also notable. The bill not only formalises the ban on new crypto-mining connections, but synchronises with the broader policy shift to accelerate the NCTL and re-shape grid access rules. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2026 and extend into the early 2030s. For the grid, this means a period of constrained supply allocation while demand from resource-intensive projects expands.

Community and Indigenous groups have been emphasising that increased industrial electrification must occur in consultation and benefit-sharing with First Nations. The legislation allows for First Nations co-ownership of the transmission line and signals a broader reconciliation dimension to the infrastructure strategy.

In the crypto-community the reaction is sharp. Firms and investors note that BC’s abundant hydro power was a major attraction to set up mining operations at scale. With the ban in place, developers will need to evaluate stranded-asset risk or shift to other Canadian provinces or international venues. Some warn that innovation in GPU- and AI-mining overlap may find itself constrained as power availability tightens.

From a global lens, British Columbia joins a growing cohort of jurisdictions imposing stricter controls on high-energy crypto-activities and re-examining how emerging tech intersects with energy policy. The regulation underscores the tension between rapid tech growth and public-utility responsibilities in regions reliant on renewables and constrained transmission.