Connect with us

Published

on

Russia’s decision to stop gas exports to European Union (EU) states via Ukraine marks the end of a decades-long energy arrangement, leaving significant geopolitical and economic consequences. The termination of the five-year transit agreement, which expired on January 1, 2025, has sparked tensions across Europe, particularly in Eastern European countries reliant on Russian energy supplies.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned the move, stating that Ukraine would not allow Russia to “earn additional billions on our blood.” In contrast, Poland’s government celebrated the cut-off as another victory over Moscow, further isolating Russia from European markets. Meanwhile, the European Commission assured EU states that they were prepared for the change, with most countries able to adjust to the disruption. However, Moldova, which is not an EU member, has already begun experiencing energy shortages.

Russian energy giant Gazprom confirmed that gas exports via Ukraine ceased on Wednesday at 08:00 local time (05:00 GMT). This marks the first time since 1991 that Russia will no longer send gas to Europe through this route. While the immediate impact has been relatively mild for many EU nations, the symbolic and strategic ramifications are profound. Although Russia has lost an important market, President Vladimir Putin asserts that the EU will be the most affected by the disruption.

The EU had significantly reduced its reliance on Russian gas since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, with Russian gas comprising less than 10% of EU imports in 2023 compared to 40% in 2021. Despite this decline, several Eastern EU countries, including Slovakia and Austria, remain heavily dependent on Russian supplies, making the cessation of gas flow a critical issue. Slovakia, in particular, has become the main entry point for Russian gas into the EU and now faces higher costs for alternative routes. Slovakia’s Prime Minister, Robert Fico, warned of “drastic” consequences for EU countries following the deal’s expiry, and tensions escalated when he threatened to halt electricity exports to Ukraine. Zelensky accused Fico of aiding Moscow’s war efforts and weakening Ukraine.

Poland has pledged support to Ukraine in case Slovakia follows through on its threat, emphasizing the availability of alternative gas routes through terminals in Croatia and connections from Germany and Poland. Poland has also been sourcing gas from the U.S., Qatar, and the North Sea.

Moldova, which relies on Russian gas for power generation, is facing severe challenges. The breakaway region of Transnistria, which depends on Moldova for gas supplies, has already been affected by the cutoff, with heating and hot water suspended. Moldova’s Prime Minister, Dorin Recean, accused Russia of using energy as a political weapon, exacerbating the situation amid a winter cold snap.

The European Union has increasingly turned to liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Qatar and the U.S., as well as piped gas from Norway, to reduce its dependence on Russia. In December, the European Commission announced plans to fully replace gas transit through Ukraine with alternative sources in the coming years.

Business

Disparities in Material Welfare Across Europe Highlighted by Key Indicator

Published

on

By

A key indicator of household material welfare, Actual Individual Consumption (AIC) per capita, reveals significant variations across Europe. Expressed in Purchasing Power Standards (PPS), AIC measures all goods and services used by households, whether purchased directly or provided by the government or nonprofit organizations. As a result, it offers valuable insight into living standards across the continent.

In 2023, Luxembourg ranked at the top of the list, with AIC per capita 36% above the EU average, at 136% of the EU’s benchmark. In contrast, Bulgaria and Hungary recorded some of the lowest material welfare levels in the European Union, with AIC per capita at just 70% of the EU average. The overall EU average, which encompasses 27 member states, is set at 100.

Nine EU countries recorded AIC levels above the EU average. In addition to Luxembourg, these countries include Germany (119%), the Netherlands (119%), Austria (114%), Belgium (113%), Denmark (108%), France (106%), Sweden (106%), and Finland (105%). Among the EU’s largest economies, Germany and the Netherlands performed the best, followed by France, where welfare was 6% above the EU average. Meanwhile, Italy’s material welfare matched the EU average, and Spain, at 91%, ranked the lowest among the “Big Four.”

On the opposite end of the spectrum, Central and Eastern European countries, along with several EU candidate nations, generally reported lower AIC per capita. Latvia, Estonia, Croatia, and Slovakia follow Hungary and Bulgaria in showing more than 20% lower material welfare than the EU average.

Outside the EU, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries reported higher material welfare levels than the EU. Norway and Switzerland exceeded the EU average, with Norway at 24% above and Switzerland 16% higher. In contrast, all six EU candidate countries fell below the EU average, with Turkey, at 84%, performing better than nine EU countries, including Poland (83%) and Greece (80%).

While Nordic and Western European nations consistently show higher AIC per capita, reflecting better material welfare, Central and Eastern Europe, along with EU candidate countries, exhibit lower AIC figures. This disparity highlights notable regional differences in living standards across Europe.

Over the past three years, several countries experienced shifts in material welfare. Denmark saw the most significant decline, dropping from 120% of the EU average in 2020 to 108% in 2023. Meanwhile, Ireland, Bulgaria, and Spain reported significant increases in AIC per capita, with Turkey recording the most substantial rise among EU candidates, moving from 64% to 84%.

Eurostat explains that AIC is a comprehensive measure of household material well-being, accounting for all household expenditures, including those for food, clothing, housing, and healthcare. This indicator offers a more equitable way to compare living standards across different regions and countries, adjusting for variations in price levels.

Continue Reading

Business

Biden Blocks $14.9 Billion US Steel Takeover by Nippon Steel, Sparking Controversy

Published

on

By

US President Joe Biden has blocked the proposed $14.9 billion acquisition of US Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel, citing national security concerns and fulfilling a campaign promise to protect American industries. The decision has raised tensions with Japan and sparked fears about its impact on future foreign investments in the US.

Biden explained that foreign ownership of US Steel posed risks to national security, emphasizing that maintaining a strong, domestically-owned steel industry is essential for national defense and infrastructure. “Steel powers our country: our infrastructure, our auto industry, and our defense industrial base,” Biden said in a statement. He also stated that the transaction would undermine the resilience of US supply chains, particularly in critical sectors.

The move follows pressure from the United Steelworkers union, which had expressed concerns over the potential loss of jobs and the long-term viability of the steel industry. The union hailed Biden’s decision as “the right move for our members and our national security.”

Nippon Steel and US Steel, however, strongly condemned the decision, claiming that the review process had been manipulated for political purposes. The two companies stated they would take “appropriate action to protect their legal rights,” signaling the possibility of a legal challenge. They also argued that the merger would have strengthened the US steel industry, improved competitiveness, and safeguarded American jobs.

Japanese officials reacted swiftly, with Yoji Muto, Japan’s industry and trade minister, expressing disappointment over Biden’s decision. Muto warned that it could harm future investment between Japan and the US, adding that the Japanese government would take the matter seriously. The decision has also raised concerns within the business communities of both nations.

The proposed merger, announced in December 2023, had been closely watched by both governments. Nippon Steel, the world’s fourth-largest steelmaker, had aimed to expand its presence in the US by acquiring US Steel, a company with a storied history in American industry. US Steel had warned that without the merger, it might be forced to close factories, affecting workers and local communities, particularly in Pennsylvania, a crucial swing state in the upcoming 2024 election.

Despite the companies’ efforts to allay concerns, including pledges to protect jobs and fund workforce training programs, Biden stood firm in his opposition. The decision has drawn criticism from various quarters, including conservatives and business groups, some of whom argue that it could deter foreign investments in the US.

White House spokesperson John Kirby defended the move, clarifying that it was not aimed at Japan but at preserving US steel-making capabilities. Analysts speculate that Nippon Steel and US Steel may attempt to renegotiate the deal under a future administration, potentially with more favorable terms.

The fallout from the decision could have lasting effects on US-Japan relations, with some questioning the impact on bilateral ties and future economic cooperation.

Continue Reading

Business

Apple Agrees to $95 Million Settlement Over Allegations of Eavesdropping Through Siri

Published

on

By

Apple has agreed to pay $95 million to settle a lawsuit accusing the tech giant of secretly listening to users through its virtual assistant, Siri. The settlement, which was reached in a preliminary agreement, comes after claims that Apple eavesdropped on users’ conversations and shared voice recordings with advertisers.

The lawsuit alleges that Siri was activated without users’ consent, even when the wake phrase “Hey, Siri” was not used. The claimants also argue that Apple’s failure to delete these recordings led to them being shared with advertisers, who used the data to target users with personalized ads.

Although Apple has not admitted to any wrongdoing, the company has stated in court filings that it denies the allegations that it recorded or disclosed conversations without consent. Additionally, Apple claims it permanently deleted individual Siri audio recordings collected prior to October 2019.

The lead plaintiff in the case, Fumiko Lopez, alleges that both she and her daughter were recorded without their permission. They claim that after discussing products like Air Jordans, they began seeing targeted ads for those products.

The lawsuit is classified as a class action, meaning it is brought forward by a small group of individuals on behalf of a larger group of affected users. In this case, eligible US-based claimants could receive up to $20 per Siri-enabled device they owned between 2014 and 2019. Lawyers representing the claimants are expected to receive 30% of the settlement fee, amounting to nearly $30 million.

Apple’s decision to settle, despite denying any liability, allows the company to avoid the risks of a lengthy trial that could result in a higher payout. The settlement amount, while substantial, is less than the potential cost of a trial verdict, especially as Apple has continued to see strong financial performance. The company reported $94.9 billion in revenue for the three months ending September 2024.

This settlement adds to a growing list of class action lawsuits Apple has faced in recent years. In January 2024, Apple began paying out in a $500 million lawsuit over allegations of deliberately slowing down older iPhones. Earlier in March, it agreed to pay $490 million in a class action over its App Store practices in the UK. The company is also facing a class action from the consumer group Which?, accusing Apple of overcharging customers for its iCloud service.

The same law firm representing the claimants in the Siri case is also suing Google for similar allegations of eavesdropping through Google devices, with that case ongoing in the same California court.

Continue Reading

Trending