News related to
trade

By R. Suryamurthy India’s student mobility crisis is no longer a question of data, it is an indictment of a system that has refused to reform while the world moved on. The new NITI Aayog paper does not so much analyse this imbalance as expose it. The numbers are brutal: for every foreign student who […]

The article India’s Higher-Education System Is Driving Students Out — Not Bringing The World In appeared first on Latest India news, analysis and reports on Newspack by India Press Agency).

Beijing has initiated sweeping agricultural trade measures targeting the United States, Canada and the European Union as a means to counter duties imposed on Chinese electric vehicles. The move centres on sectors worth billions of dollars in export value and signals a new front in the global tariff standoff as Chinese factories ramp up global auto-sales ambitions.

According to official announcements and industry trackers, China imposed tariffs and import restrictions on major agricultural products including soybeans, pork, canola and cognac after Western governments raised tariffs on Chinese EV imports—some reaching 100 per cent in the US, and up to 35 per cent in the EU. Those duties stemmed from concerns about subsidised manufacturing, imports displacing domestic output and national-security implications tied to EV supply-chains.

One Chinese commercial diplomat told Canadian media that Ottawa’s export restraints on Chinese EVs directly triggered Beijing’s agriculture penalties. Canadian farmers in canola and pulses markets have already seen orders plummet and export corridors shut or taxed heavily. European spirits producers also face duties: cognac exports to China, valued at around $1.7 billion annually, have dropped by about 35 per cent since the levy took effect.

Analysts say the strategy is calculated. While China’s domestic market remains protected from full import competition, its international agriculture import volumes give Beijing leverage. An academic at Peking University noted that “a slight adjustment in China’s import preferences can ripple through farming regions and rural constituencies that carry significant political weight”. By focusing on sectors with concentrated politically-sensitive producers, China increases the pressure on Western governments to reconsider EV levies.

On the Western side, officials are signalling that they are unlikely to surrender their EV-tariff stance. A senior analyst at a Brussels-based think-tank said that the European Commission had “clearly shown that it was not willing to back down from the EV case”, citing China’s rapid auto-industry progress and state-support programmes. With climate targets and supply-chain security on the table, Western capitals view EV tariffs as integral to domestic industry viability.

Yet the backlash in agriculture could be deeper and more enduring than the EV duties themselves. A supply-chain expert explained that new contracts, logistics investments and alternative-buyer relationships developed in response to Chinese import suspensions may lock in shifts for years to come. In concrete terms, U. S. soybean farmers—who sold $12.6 billion worth to China in 2024—have seen export volumes fall to zero for key new-crop shipments, while Canadian producers of rapeseed and pea oil are facing a near-complete market closure under 100 per cent tariffs.

Observers point out that agriculture is an especially potent tool in trade diplomacy because it touches multiple layers of the economy: from regional employment to global commodity markets and corporate finances. By wielding farm-product bans or tariffs, Beijing can inflict political damage in sending countries while avoiding direct escalation of high-tech sectors where Western governments might respond more aggressively.

For Western farm sectors the choices are stark. Some firms are exploring alternative markets in Latin America, Africa or South-East Asia, while others are pressing their governments for compensation or trade-negotiation efforts. Meanwhile, Western trade officials are increasingly emphasising diversification of supply-chains away from China, which may dampen China’s leverage over time.

The cryptocurrency futures market experienced a significant wave of forced liquidations, amounting to $1.03 billion over the past 24 hours. A considerable portion of the liquidations occurred in long positions, totaling $725 million, while $305 million worth of short positions were also closed.

The dramatic liquidations were triggered by volatile market movements, which saw sharp price fluctuations across multiple digital assets. These price swings were exacerbated by shifts in market sentiment, which contributed to the rapid unwinding of leveraged positions. The forced liquidations come amid a broader backdrop of market uncertainty, as traders adjust their positions in response to global economic factors and the ongoing regulatory scrutiny of the cryptocurrency sector.

A notable driver of the sell-off was the high level of leverage employed by market participants. Crypto futures markets, particularly those offering derivatives with high leverage, often see sharp price corrections as a result of large liquidation events. When asset prices move against traders’ positions, forced liquidations can amplify the price movements, resulting in cascading effects that further destabilize the market.

This liquidations event reflects the high-risk nature of trading in the cryptocurrency space, especially with the volatile price action witnessed in major tokens such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other altcoins. Market analysts note that a significant portion of these liquidations occurred as Bitcoin’s price struggled to maintain momentum, dipping below key support levels. Other altcoins, including Ethereum and Solana, also saw substantial price corrections, which intensified the market’s turmoil.

While the forced liquidations have had a short-term destabilising effect, many market observers suggest that they may serve to recalibrate market positions, potentially clearing out overleveraged traders. However, the long-term implications for the market remain unclear. Crypto futures markets are known for their volatility, which can often result in sudden price movements, leaving traders vulnerable to unexpected liquidations during sharp corrections.

The level of forced liquidations seen in this event underscores the risks associated with high-leverage trading, particularly in a market as volatile as cryptocurrencies. As more traders flock to these markets, seeking greater profits from leveraged positions, such liquidations will likely become a recurring feature in the digital asset landscape.

Despite these liquidations, some analysts argue that the broader trend in the crypto market remains positive, with institutional adoption and growing interest from mainstream investors continuing to support long-term bullish prospects. They point to the increasing recognition of cryptocurrencies as a viable asset class, with traditional financial institutions exploring ways to integrate blockchain technology and crypto assets into their services.

On the other hand, the market faces significant regulatory challenges, particularly in key jurisdictions such as the United States and Europe. Governmental authorities have expressed concerns over the potential for market manipulation, fraud, and the lack of investor protection in the largely unregulated crypto space. These regulatory uncertainties add another layer of complexity to the market, as traders weigh the risks of entering a space with evolving rules and regulations.

At the same time, some proponents of cryptocurrency markets argue that forced liquidations and market volatility are simply part of the growing pains of a maturing market. They note that as liquidity improves and market participants become more sophisticated, the frequency and intensity of these liquidation events may diminish over time.

Global stock markets continue to experience significant losses, with sharp declines across major indices in Asia and other regions. The ongoing sell-off in equities has been driven by a combination of factors, including rising fears surrounding the stability of the global economy and concerns over the sustainability of the recent surge in artificial intelligence investments. These developments have raised alarm among investors, who are now bracing for the potential consequences of an AI bubble burst. As shares in major companies tumble, analysts are warning that the broader market could face deeper turmoil if the situation continues to deteriorate.

The volatility began when shares in leading technology firms, particularly in the AI sector, showed signs of weakness. Companies such as Google, Microsoft, and NVIDIA, which have heavily invested in AI technologies, saw substantial declines in their stock prices. Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, joined the growing chorus of voices warning that no company, regardless of its size or industry, would be immune if the AI-driven bubble were to burst. His remarks have further heightened concerns about the potential risks associated with the rapid adoption of AI technologies in various sectors, from finance to healthcare and manufacturing.

The sell-off has not been limited to just tech stocks. Broader market indices have also suffered, with the MSCI Asia-Pacific Index recording steep losses. Investors are particularly focused on the outlook for interest rates, as central banks, especially the Federal Reserve, have indicated that they will continue their tightening policies to combat inflation. This uncertainty regarding monetary policy has contributed to the risk-off sentiment, leading many investors to retreat from stocks and other risk assets.

Compounding the situation, the price of bitcoin, a barometer for risk appetite, has fallen to a seven-month low, reflecting the broader pullback from riskier assets. The digital currency, which had seen impressive gains earlier in the year, has now become a symbol of the broader unease in global financial markets. Its drop has triggered additional concerns, with some market participants fearing that the crypto market’s downturn could further exacerbate the sell-off in traditional equities.

The economic uncertainty has been exacerbated by geopolitical tensions, including the ongoing trade disputes between major economies, rising energy prices, and concerns over global supply chains. These factors have combined to create a perfect storm for investors, who are now facing mounting pressure to reassess their portfolios and risk exposures.

Corporate earnings reports are also under scrutiny, with many firms expected to report weaker-than-expected results due to higher input costs and slowing demand. Companies that had previously benefited from the pandemic-driven digital transformation, such as e-commerce giants and cloud computing providers, are now seeing their growth rates slow down. This slowdown is further contributing to the negative sentiment surrounding the stock market.

As the stock market sell-off continues, experts are advising caution and suggesting that investors should prepare for continued volatility in the months ahead. Some are calling for a reassessment of the risk associated with high-growth sectors, particularly those heavily reliant on AI technologies, while others recommend diversification to protect against potential downturns.

Ebury, a leading financial services provider, has confirmed its role as a key sponsor for the upcoming Scotland London Africa Week in 2025. The event, organised by the Scottish Africa Business Association, aims to foster stronger economic ties between Scotland and the African continent, highlighting the role of trade, investment, and business opportunities in the region.

The partnership with Ebury, renowned for its expertise in global trade finance and foreign exchange solutions, underscores the growing importance of financial services in facilitating cross-border business relationships. The firm’s sponsorship will be centred around the Scotland Africa Networking Reception, which will take place at Dover House in London. This reception serves as a key platform for Scottish businesses, entrepreneurs, and investors to engage with African counterparts and explore new avenues for collaboration.

Scotland London Africa Week is a prominent event that brings together leaders from both public and private sectors to discuss and promote the growing potential of the African market. Through networking sessions, panel discussions, and targeted events, the week-long celebration will provide an opportunity for businesses to forge partnerships, tap into new markets, and discover emerging opportunities within Africa.

Ebury’s involvement with the event highlights the company’s commitment to supporting the economic relationship between Africa and the UK, especially Scotland, which has increasingly sought to expand its international trade network. The company’s expertise in cross-border payments and currency exchange is expected to add valuable insights to the discussions around enhancing financial inclusivity and reducing barriers for businesses in Africa and the UK.

Scotland, with its strong international trade links and vibrant financial services sector, continues to be a key player in fostering relationships with Africa. The country’s emphasis on promoting innovation, sustainable development, and investment in emerging markets aligns well with the strategic goals of the Africa Week.

With the backing of Ebury, the networking reception will focus on addressing critical issues such as trade finance, investment flows, and economic partnerships. The reception will also offer an invaluable networking opportunity for delegates from across the continent and beyond to exchange ideas and explore avenues for collaboration. This sponsorship comes at a time when both the UK and African nations are looking to bolster trade relations and deepen economic cooperation.

An in‑depth probe by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists has unveiled a sprawling network of criminal finance powered by cryptocurrencies, highlighting how digital asset platforms, cash‑to‑crypto storefronts and unregulated exchange desks have become central to laundering money for human‑trafficking rings, drug cartels and Russian organised crime groups. The investigation, under the title “The Coin Laundry”, involved more than 100 journalists across 38 news outlets and casts a harsh light on how the crypto‑space has evolved into a parallel shadow financial system.

The core finding of the ICIJ project is that thousands of transactions—ranging from hundreds of millions of dollars—have flowed through crypto platforms that either lacked robust anti‑money‑laundering safeguards or deliberately facilitated anonymity. Some of the biggest cryptocurrency exchanges are shown to have moved hundreds of millions in funds tied to illicit actors even after criminal pleas and enforcement actions. The scale and the reach of the systems uncovered suggest that the digital‑asset industry has matured from niche speculation into a global conduit for organised illicit flows.

The architecture of this criminal system reveals several layers. First, cash‑to‑crypto storefronts operating in places like Dubai, Toronto and other jurisdictions emerge as physical bridges where cash is converted into crypto away from traditional banking rails. These outlets, according to the investigation, serve entities that “have lots of cash they want to offload without using a bank”. Secondly, certain crypto exchanges and wallets have been used to take funds from traffickers, drug networks or Russian criminal gangs, convert them into digital assets, transfer those across borders, then convert back into fiat currencies—often in jurisdictions with weak enforcement. Thirdly, mixers, anonymised cryptocurrencies and opaque wallet‑chains have enabled the origin and destination of funds to be obscured, making law‑enforcement tracking significantly harder.

Criminal networks profiting from these systems include people‑trafficking racks, where victims are moved across borders and payment flows routed via crypto; drug cartels that convert illicit cash into digital tokens to hide funds and move value swiftly; and Russian organised crime groups that make use of sanctions‑evading platforms to transfer funds internationally. The investigation points out how several Russian‑linked exchanges came under scrutiny after moving billions in assets on behalf of sanctioned individuals.

For regulators and law‑enforcement agencies, the ICIJ findings pose a serious challenge. Cryptocurrency was once hailed for its transparency because of blockchain traceability, yet the system has matured into one where anonymisation tools, cross‑jurisdictional flows and cash‑on‑ramps erode that promise. One analysis notes how the boundaryless nature of crypto and cash conversions has “erased national borders” in laundering schemes. The combination of weak regulatory oversight, technological complexity and global jurisdictional gaps means that the crypto sector now offers potentials previously reserved for traditional offshore banking and shell‑company networks.

From a regulatory‑policy perspective the report surfaces key faultlines. Many exchanges either operate in regulatory grey zones or rely on lax “know your customer” checks, enabling high‑risk actors to open accounts and move funds. The ICIJ investigation underscores how crypto to cash workflows are particularly acute in jurisdictions where enforcement is weak or cash‑based storefronts operate with minimal oversight. In India for example, investigators found that 144 cases over three years involved crypto routes used to funnel stolen or illicit cyber‑crime proceeds into global syndicates. That observation underscores how burgeoning crypto markets in emerging economies may be especially vulnerable to exploitation.

Industries beyond crypto feel the fallout. Traditional banking institutions face reputational risk when their clients or connected transactions use crypto intermediaries. Law‑enforcement agencies face mounting costs tracing and investigating these flows when the end‑destination is hidden behind layers of wallets or front businesses. Victims of people‑trafficking or drug networks often find no effective path to recovery, as the digital funds vanish into complex webs. One ICIJ commentary notes that while crypto platforms have profited from these illicit flows, those harmed are “left with little hope of justice”.

The ecosystem enabling this laundering structure demonstrates a careful interplay of legitimate and illegitimate actors. On one side are mainstream crypto exchanges, sometimes guilty of compliance failures or negligent oversight; on the other are fringe services—mixers that convert one token to another to obfuscate origins, anonymous coins such as Monero, and cash‑to‑crypto kiosks possibly operating in jurisdictions with lax enforcement. In the French legal reform context, a law recognising funds passing through anonymisation tools as part of money‑laundering was introduced, acknowledging how tools once fringe are now central to criminal flows.

From the enforcement standpoint the challenge is two‑fold: tracing funds and prosecuting high‑level actors. Blockchain analytics can trace token flows, but when the end‑recipient wallet is converted into cash via shadow exchanges or laundromats, it becomes a near‑impossible task. This is compounded when jurisdictions refuse to cooperate or when the conversion happens in physical storefronts beyond bank controls. One academic note highlights that conventional AML practices struggle to detect “subgraph” laundering patterns that exploit layered wallet behaviour and network effects.

The global regulatory environment currently appears mismatched to the scale of the problem. While policy makers have begun to act—such as the French law targeting anonymisation tools—many jurisdictions lack the statutory frameworks or enforcement resources to address crypto‑laundering at scale. Regulatory gaps are further compounded when major jurisdictions focus only on tokens traded on exchanges rather than on emerging narratives involving cash‑to‑crypto desks, unregulated decentralized platforms or off‑ramp services. One commentator described the flow from cash into crypto as “after tax‑havens, dirty money finds a new home: cryptocurrency”.

From a financial‑crime perspective, the finding that major exchanges still processed illicit funds even after criminal prosecutions signifies systemic weakness. This suggests that bad‑actor networks can rely on deep pockets, jurisdiction shifting and complex intermediaries to keep funds moving. The ICIJ investigation lists two of the world’s largest exchanges moving hundreds of millions in illicit funds after pleading guilty to crimes related to money laundering. These revelations raise questions about whether enough internal controls exist in the high‑volume crypto market and whether enforcement action has produced meaningful change.

The implications for victims of organised crime and for global governance are stark. For people trafficking survivors the money flows support networks that exploit human lives yet vanish into anonymous wallets across jurisdictions, making asset recovery and restitution extremely difficult. For drug‑trafficking networks, the agility and cross‑border speed of crypto conversion process provide large scale advantage. For states dealing with sanctions enforcement, the ability of crypto platforms to host cross‑border flows undermines the effectiveness of sanctions regimes.

While the ICIJ investigation sets out a clearer map of how these systems function, it also signals that the public and private sectors face an urgent need for stronger deterrence. Some proposals include mandatory global standards for exchange KYC/AML, registration of cash‑to‑crypto on‑ramp services, enhanced international cooperation for wallet tracing, seizure frameworks for anonymised funds and real‑time monitoring of conversion windows. A related academic analysis recommends adopting subgraph‑based network detection systems to identify laundering patterns earlier.

Industry players replying to the revelations argue that the bulk of legitimate crypto transactions are untainted and that enhancements to compliance are underway. Exchanges emphasise that transparency is improving with on‑chain traceability and that many illicit flows represent a small fraction of total volume. Some operators point out that regulators themselves are still developing the controls needed for a digital‑asset environment and that over‑regulation risks stifling innovation.

In parallel, a cultural shift is emerging where law‑enforcement bodies increasingly view crypto not just as a speculative market but as a core part of the financial‑crime ecosystem. Tasks once reserved for tracking offshore shell companies or cash couriers now must include tracing smart‑contracts, wallet clusters and token flows across borders. That evolution places a premium on technological capacity, inter‑agency cooperation and jurisdiction‑bridging legal tools.