Crypto regulation has long been a topic of debate in policymaking circles. As the white-hot market continues to soar in popularity and adaptation throughout the world, lawmakers in the United States are scouring common ground to comprehend the complex jargon and mechanism of the crypto sphere. Potential policies should be scrupulous yet inviting for the digital revolution to fully unravel in this modern financial reality. And with the rapid expansion of cryptocurrencies in the notoriously arcane derivatives market, lawmakers are expediting efforts to harness the outpacing development with a proper framework before another financial crisis overwhelms the economy. The question at the forefront is a dilemma: how to categorize the crypto offerings in a traditional sense?
The Bitcoin ETFs were all the rave when the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) – the regulator of the derivatives markets – flashed the green light to the bitcoin futures to start trading in 2017. Yet, a debate sparked in terms of the broader classification of the crypto market. Would you define cryptocurrencies (tokens like Bitcoin and Ether) as securities or commodities? NFTs are digital products. By that definition, cryptocurrencies ought to be too. However, securities are passive investments in an enterprise with the expectation of returns (US Securities Act of 1933). Commodities are goods/services that entail a future delivery contingent on a contract (US Commodity Exchange Act of 1936). Neither of these definitions fully contemplate the concept of cryptocurrencies or NFTs. Lawmakers, regulators, and even investors are thus at the crossroads over this matter. An important decision is at stake over appropriate classification: whether the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulates these tokens or should the CFTC take the helm.
According to a rare bipartisan stance, both the Democrat and the Republican representatives lean towards the class of commodities, calling on the derivatives regulator to reign in controlling cryptocurrencies. In a recent letter to the Chairman of the CFTC, the bipartisan members on both the Senate and House Agriculture Committees have called on the ‘critical role’ of the derivatives watchdog in regulating these digital assets. Noteworthy Senators like Debbie Stabenow and John Boozman wrote: “It is imperative that customers stay protected from fraud and abuse and that these markets are fair and transparent.”
Reflecting a similar sentiment, Rostin Behnam – Chairman of the CFTC – stated that his powers are mostly limited to overseeing derivatives. The Agriculture Committees of the Congress oversee the CFTC regulating much of the expansive $610 trillion worth of the global derivatives market. Yet, he pointed out that with explosive growth in digital tokens, Congress ought to do more than merely direct the CFTC. It should also ensure that the CFTC has the tools and jurisdiction to function at its fullest potential. During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Agriculture Committee, Behnam stated: “We’ve been one of the few cops on the beat of limited statutory authority related to anti-fraud and anti-manipulation.” He also expressed his firm opinion to lawmakers regarding the “expansion of the authority of the CFTC.”
The jurisdiction, however, is contended by the SEC: claiming that the virtual currencies are securities; thus should fall in the purview of the SEC. The highlight of this supposed clash over regulatory authority is Gary Gensler – Chairman of the SEC. He has garnered attention for his stringent views rivaling the CFTC’s friendlier approach towards the crypto sphere. While Gensler classifies bitcoin as a commodity, he has confusingly refused to address the classification of Ether either as a commodity or a security. Nonetheless, the time is elapsing as players like Coinbase are rapidly expanding into the derivatives market, further blurring the line between traditional and virtual markets in the process. Until now, many of the US exchanges were skeptical from moving into the derivatives market due to regulatory uncertainty. Their global counterparts like Binance dabbled in leverage without the regulatory oversight feared by the US exchanges. However, more and more are now expanding into the fast-growing market. Meanwhile, the White House is weighing an executive order to draft a blueprint for regulating the market across the government. All while the broader classification is still questionable.
Whether to catalog digital tokens as commodities or securities, this debate is futile for institutions like Coinbase and FTX. These crypto exchanges lay the groundwork in diverse markets while operating the spot market. While the regulators are scrambling to define new digital phenomenons, these exchanges are preparing to dominate the bearish trends via diversification. And while the government is still envisioning tighter frameworks, these exchanges are hedging against the volatility that brings infamy to cryptocurrencies. The lawmakers should understand that while their fears of fraud and manipulation are justified, collaboration with these exchanges might actually solve this dilemma. The head of Coinbase Institutional, Brett Tajpual, hinted at such a notion: “We want to work with the regulators to make sure everything is in position to launch as early as we can.” He was talking about the recent acquisition of FairX, a CFTC-regulated crypto futures exchange.
Behnam also admitted that while the CFTC controls the $2.7 billion worth digital asset market, a strong collaboration with the SEC would be beneficial in regulating an industry of such colossal size and appeal to retail and institutional investors alike. The crypto expansion would continue to entice some, disenchant others. The right approach is collaborative engagement. Not just amongst regulators but on a broader scale, including these crypto exchanges and maybe even retail traders. The crypto sphere is still perplexing to lawmakers, these crypto visionaries might be the right tool for the regulators to maneuver through the complexities without hindering the financial revolution that is afoot.
Reskilling Revolution: Leaders Preparing 1 Billion People for Tomorrow’s Economy
Investing broadly in the skills of the future for both today’s and tomorrow’s next-generation workforce could add an additional $8.3 trillion in increased productivity to the global economy by 2030.
The Reskilling Revolution initiative, a coalition of 50 CEOs, 25 ministers and 350 organizations committed to realizing these gains for their economies, societies and organizations, marked two years of progress at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2022 in Davos today. Their work will benefit over 100 million workers on their journey towards reaching 1 billion people by 2030 with better education, skills and economic opportunity.
Accelerating the Reskilling Revolution
Global inequities in lifelong learning and childhood education, a pandemic that closed schools and workplaces and rapid technological change are highlighting the need to double down on reskilling, upskilling and the future of learning. The Reskilling Revolution initiative, launched at the World Economic Forum’s 50th Annual Meeting in January 2020, is working to provide 1 billion people with better education, skills and economic opportunity by 2030.
At its heart is a commitment from over 50 CEOs to inspire global business leadership on the upskilling, reskilling and human capital investment agenda. By working together with a growing network of national-level country accelerators launched to date in 12 countries – Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brazil, Cambodia, Georgia, Greece, India, Oman, Pakistan, South Africa, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, with knowledge support from Denmark, Finland, Singapore and Switzerland – the Reskilling Revolution has mobilized a multistakeholder community of over 350 organizations across 12 countries and is on track to benefit 100 million people on its journey towards 1 billion.
“In an era of multiple disruptions to the labour market – the pandemic, supply chain changes, the green transition, technological transformation – the one ‘no regret’ investment all governments and business can make is in education, reskilling and upskilling. It is the best pathway to expanding opportunity, enhancing social mobility and accelerating future growth,” said Saadia Zahidi, Managing Director, World Economic Forum.
Enabling Education 4.0
Two years into its work the initiative will expand beyond adult reskilling and upskilling and integrate a focus on education for children and youth. These efforts will be taken forward by a new Education 4.0 Alliance, bringing together 20 leading education organizations at the Forum’s Annual Meeting 2022.
A new report from the project, Catalysing Education 4.0 Investing in the Future of Learning for a Human-Centric Recovery, focuses on preparing today’s generation of school-age children with better collaborative problem-solving that could add $2.54 trillion – over $3,000 per school-age child – from this one skill alone.
The report, developed with support from the LEGO Foundation and in consultation with leading education experts from the public, private and educational sectors, finds that investment in the skills of the future for primary and secondary school learners would create an additional $489 billion in Europe, $458 billion in South Asia, $333 billion in East Asia, $332 billion in Latin America, $266 billion in the Middle East, $235 billion in North America, $179 billion in sub-Saharan Africa, and $163 billion in Central Asia.
Meanwhile, China ($356 billion), the United States ($218 billion), Brazil ($143 billion), Mexico ($80 billion) and Italy ($72 billion) are the five countries standing to gain the most, while the benefits relative to the size of their economies today would be greatest in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.
To unlock this education transformation, the Education 4.0 initiative will focus on three key investment areas: new assessment mechanisms; adoption of new learning technologies; and empowerment of the teaching workforce.
Expanding the Accelerator network
Complementing the Skills Accelerators, the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting also featured the official launch of the first school-age focused Education 4.0 Accelerator, a national-level public-private collaboration platform for action. The Education Accelerators – complementing a network of successful Closing the Skills Gap Accelerators – aim to mainstream technology-enhanced learning experiences, implement new measurement mechanisms, empower educators and mobilize investment in the sector.
Bangladesh will be the first country to pioneer this new model in Asia. Dipu Moni, Minister of Education, Bangladesh, said: “Bangladesh is committed to ensuring high-quality education for all children and youth. We are delighted to partner with the World Economic Forum to launch the first Education Accelerator in South Asia and to be part of this global network to advance the Education 4.0 agenda.”
Sanctions against Russia: do they have any point?
It’s hard to recall a day since the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine when there was no mentioning about new sanctions being imposed against Russia. On May 9th, the EU announced that it had almost finished preparations for the sixth package of sanctions, and rumors on the Internet are already mentioning the seventh.
What are sanctions?
In brief, sanctions are a list of political and economic decisions applied by states and organizations in order to protect national interests, international law, and defense from threats to international peace and security. As a rule, they are temporary and are removed when the cause/threat has been eliminated.
According to the EU’s official website, “Restrictive measures (sanctions) are an essential tool in the EU’s common foreign and security policy (CFSP), through which the EU can intervene where necessary to prevent conflict or respond to emerging or current crises. In spite of their colloquial name ‘sanctions’, EU restrictive measures are not punitive. They are intended to bring about a change in policy or activity by targeting non-EU countries, as well as entities and individuals, responsible for the malign behaviour at stake.”
How many sanctions have been imposed against Russia in total?
On May 8th, the Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Vyacheslav Volodin shared a post on his Telegram channel that “10 128 sanctions have been imposed against our country. More than against any other state in the entire history of their existence.” From this number, 2,754 were introduced in the period from 2014 (the Crimean issue) and before the beginning of the special operation in Ukraine. The rest – more than seven thousand – were introduced in a short three-month period. According to The Castellum.AI, a service which takes a record of sanctions and updates weekly, as of May 9, their number has already exceeded 7,600, making Russia the state with the largest number of sanctions imposed. For comparison: 3,161 sanctions have been imposed against Iran, 2,608 – against Syria, and 2,077 – against North Korea. Other states can “boast” with the list containing less than 1,000 sanctions. Thus, in a short period of time, Russia not only got on the list of sanctioned countries, but also topped it.
The sanctions have affected almost every sector of Russia – from individuals, which list already counts numbers in the hundreds, to the spheres of energy, economy, trade… The enumeration can go on for a long time. It can be said that there is practically not a single area left that wasn’t affected by sanctions: for example, one of the articles published by the Atlantic Council had the heading “What’s left to sanction in Russia?” And yet, at almost all the examples given, it is mentioned that sanctions have already been imposed in this area.
So is there anything else that can be included in the sanctions lists? The question itself is good, but alas – it will take quite a long time to search for the answer: sanctions are already everywhere.
So is there any point in sanctions?
This is quite an interesting question, although in this situation it would be more accurate to say that sanctions have not only a point, but also consequences.
As it was mentioned above, sanctions are usually temporary, but Russia has been living with almost 3,000 sanctions imposed against it for more than 8 years. Has it brought any tangible results in influencing Russia? No. Have those who introduced them achieved the result what they had introduced those sanctions for? No. Have these sanctions been lifted? No. Therefore, is there any point in imposing them on Russia? The answer is still the same – no, because as it can be observed, these sanctions are in the list of existing ones, and Russia still continues to exist, quite successfully adapting to them. And there are a lot of sanctions – 2,754 (for the period before the Ukrainian issue), but the thing is that the country against which they were introduced does not complain about its size and capabilities either.
There is a point in sanctions, and first of all – for Russia.
Following numerous bans on the export of various kinds of products, as well as the departure of many companies operating in various fields, the Russian government introduced a number of measures to support different areas, and which have already started to show positive results. According to Rosstat, several sectors of the Russian economy showed positive dynamics as soon as measures were introduced (compare to the same period of 2021): the mining industry grew by 7.8%, energy, heat and gas supply – by 1.5%, water supply and waste disposal – by 7.2%. There is also an increase in the food sector – by 1.1%, and medical production increased by as much as 46.8% compared to March 2021, and turned out to be 9.1% higher than in February 2022. As Rosstat data shows, according to a preliminary estimate of the country’s GDP for the 1st quarter 2022, there is a positive growth of 103.5% compared to the same period last year. The Economist noted that “as imports slide and exports hold up, Russia is running a record trade surplus.” The Institute of International Finance estimates that “in 2022 the current-account surplus, which includes trade and some financial flows, could come in at $250bn (15% of last year’s gdp), more than double the $120bn recorded in 2021”. As a result, the world sees that rather than damaging Russia, sanctions are contributing to its strengthening. 
The consequences of the sanctions, however, were faced not only by Russia and Belarus (which also got quite an amount of them because of good relations with Russia), but also by the rest of the world, including even the part that had nothing to do with this issue. And the consequences of those 7 thousand+ recently imposed sanctions are especially severe.
Some countries are already complaining about food shortages, as their supplies have been seriously reduced due to sanctions. People are dissatisfied with the increase of prices for various products and goods, but this is caused by the increase of fuel prices – which people are also dissatisfied with. Shocks and turmoil in the social and economic sectors started to affect the political situation both within countries and their international policies, as they have to choose whether to join the sanctions or try to stay away.
Even at the first weeks of the conflict, the United States were seen trying to put pressure on states to either join the sort of “sanctions coalition” or stay away, preventing any attempts to help Russia. As it turned out, one of these countries was China: back in April 2022, the US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman said that the sanctions imposed against Russia should give China (and President Xi personally) an idea of the consequences that it could face in case of providing assistance to Russia: “<it> gives President Xi, I think, a pretty good understanding of what might come his way should he, in fact, support Putin in any material fashion.” If there was an attempt to put pressure on China, which is far from being the last figure in the international arena, then what can be said about other states – especially European ones?
Hungary is now becoming one of the stumbling blocks, as it refuses to support sanctions with regard to the embargo on fuel imports. According to Prime Minister Viktor Orban, it will be equal to an atomic bomb dropped on the Hungarian economy, since it simply will not have time to adapt – it will take at least five years and a large number of investments. Nevertheless, he noted that Hungary is ready for negotiations – if the proposals are consistent with the interests of the state. However, according to information, a video conference between Ursula von der Leyen and Viktor Orban, held on Monday last week, did not lead to a compromise, thus delaying the adoption of the sixth – the heaviest, according to EU representatives – package of sanctions. Against this background, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki expressed the opinion that the sixth package of sanctions could be adopted in a reduced form, since “we must observe unity in the EU.”
So…what can be expected in the future?
Anglo-American Axis Needs Common Market, not Common Alliance
With the eruption of the war in Ukraine, and considering the post-war situation, the alliance system in the West and its future should be something worthy of concern.
Anglo-American Axis is a concept that I proposed well before Brexit, and such an axis has already been fully formed today. With Brexit, the United Kingdom is now no longer part of the continental European alliance. It has instead re-aligned with the United States, and reverted to being a maritime nation that it used to be.
Such an axis would not be moved by the independence inclination of France, the wish of Germany to become the leader, nor the ambition of Turkey to be a regional hegemon. It cares even less about countries like Israel, Iran, and India. What the Anglo-American Axis focuses is to control the high ground of fundamental values, so that it can win the historic future as long as civilization continues to progress. Wars in other regions do not carry much significance to it. For NATO to play a role, it must negotiate conditions with the United States. It is not the Anglo-American Axis that needs NATO, but that NATO needs the Anglo-American Axis.
The United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, the former members of the Commonwealth, have formed the largest single market in the world, with a coordinated monetary policy for the U.S. dollar and British pound. Such a market can consider certain African and South American countries, as long as they remain stable, and this usually means some “friendly dictatorships with open economies”, similar to Chile in the past.
Civilization is a dynamic force. Although many have studied monetary issues and finance, they fail to link these with civilization. In fact, these are appendages of civilization, and they are products of it. Humanity will inevitably move towards civilization.
Reskilling Revolution: Leaders Preparing 1 Billion People for Tomorrow’s Economy
Investing broadly in the skills of the future for both today’s and tomorrow’s next-generation workforce could add an additional $8.3...
Olaf Scholz Calls for Accelerated Energy Transition
In a special address delivered on the closing day of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz...
Once Rilke’s Wife
The Invasion is over. Russia will display its power and its might in a victory parade in Mariupol on 9...
Sanctions against Russia: do they have any point?
It’s hard to recall a day since the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine when there was no mentioning about...
The May 27 Coup: An Attempt to Analyze Politics in Gramscian Terms
On 27 May in 1960, Turkey witnessed its first full-fledged military coup. The coup was of a non-hierarchical nature in...
The Benefits Of Feeding Your Baby Organic Formula
There are many benefits that come from feeding your baby formula milk, not to mention that it is much easier...
Zimbabwean peacekeeper selected as UN Military Gender Advocate of the Year 2021 Award
A Zimbabwean peacekeeper who recently completed her assignment with the UN Mission in South Sudan, will receive the 2021 United...
Economy3 days ago
The Politics of New Global Borderless-Class
Middle East3 days ago
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s heady days
Economy3 days ago
Education Must Come First in our Global Economic Agenda
Defense4 days ago
U.S.’ Unperturbed Response to Indian BrahMos Launch in Pakistan: Aberration or New Normal?
South Asia4 days ago
When Politics turns Personal; The Toxic Allegations & Accusations become a Norm
Southeast Asia4 days ago
Reclaiming our future
Eastern Europe3 days ago
A Weapon of War: Rapes in the Ukraine-Russia Conflict
Africa3 days ago
South Africa on the right side of history or captured by Cold War allies?