Connect with us

Economics

Trump-Putin talks are already a ‘triumph’ for Moscow, its economy and markets

Published

on

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin talk during the family photo session at the APEC Summit in Danang, Vietnam November 11, 2017.

Jorge Silva | Reuters

Talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. counterpart Donald Trump are still days away, but the two leaders’ upcoming meeting to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine is already seen as a victory for the Kremlin, the Russian economy and global financial markets.

The discussions are set to take place on Friday in Alaska.

“This is already a big win for Putin to be invited for the first time since 2007 to meet with the U.S. president on American soil. Is a wonderful achievement, from his point of view, no conditions and the absence of Ukraine, the absence of any European representation. This is already a triumph,” Richard Portes, head of the Economics faculty at the London Business School, told CNBC Monday.

Trump-Putin talks 'already a win' for Russia, but its economy is weak, economist says

There are concerns that Ukraine could be forced to cede Russian-occupied territory to Moscow, and the mood is dour in Kyiv, whose officials, including President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, have so far not been invited to attend the talks.

Kyiv has said no deal about its future would be struck in its absence, and European leaders are pushing strongly for Ukraine’s involvement. The U.S., for its part, has said its considering inviting Zelenskyy, NBC News reported.

In the meantime, economists say the talks — which take place as Russia makes gains on the battlefield in southern and eastern Ukraine, with no ceasefire deal in sight — are already a win for Putin and his war-centered economy that is laboring under international sanctions and stubbornly high inflation of 9.4% in June.

“[Putin] starts from a relatively strong position on the battlefield. They’re advancing …On the other hand, from the economic point of view, he starts from a weak position. The Russian economy is not in very good shape. They’re running a significant fiscal deficit, partly because oil revenues are down very substantially, oil and gas [are down] because of the oil price. And … this is a weak economy,” Portes told CNBC’s “Europe Early Edition.”

Coming into talks with a strong position in the battlefield, Russia is likely to want immediate sanctions relief as part of any ceasefire deal, as well as Ukrainian territorial concessions.

The Kremlin has spied a rapprochement with Washington as an opportunity not only for an economic recovery, but investment. Russian Presidential Aide Yuri Ushakov on Saturday stated that “the economic interests of our countries intersect in Alaska and the Arctic, and there are prospects for implementing large-scale and mutually beneficial projects,” the Kremlin stated.

Portes said that if Trump “had the patience and the willingness to apply sanctions properly, then waiting [to hold talks] would result in a very significant change in the balance of forces.”

As things stand, however, Trump has mulled but so far held off on increasing sanctions on Russia. Washington has instead threatened the Kremlin’s remaining trading partners, such as India, with “secondary sanctions” and additional trade tariffs for continuing with purchases of Russian oil, which have funded Moscow’s war machine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin participates in the BRICS Summit, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, via videolink from Moscow, Russia, on July 6, 2025.

Mikhail Metzel | Via Reuters

Asked whether Trump could press ahead with more punitive sanctions to push Putin toward a peace deal, Portes asked: “Can anyone predict what the President of the United States will do from one day to the next? It’s very difficult.”

“The likelihood of an increase in sanctions pressure is significant, but … given Trump’s desire for a Nobel Prize, the the likelihood that Trump will increase sanctions at this stage. Does not look very high, but he could change his mind tomorrow,” he said.

‘Win-win’ for defense stocks

Global financial markets reacted positively to the announcement on Friday that talks to end the war would take place imminently, with bourses in Europe and U.S. rising. Defense stocks in Europe fell on the news, however, as traders appeared to bet that peace could deter further investment pledged by NATO allies.

The spot price of gold, seen as a safe haven in times of geopolitical and financial market stress, was down around 1% at $3,364 per ounce, as of 8a.m. London time on Monday.

Shares of Germany’s Rheinmetall were trading lower by almost 4% while Hensoldt declined by 1.5% and Renk fell 3.3% in early trades. Italy’s Leonardo and France’s Thales were also down by 1.9% and 1.7% respectively. Meanwhile, London-listed BAE Systems and Babcock also gave up gains from earlier in the day, down 1.1% and 1.3%, respectively around 9 a.m. London time.

But Christopher Granville, managing director at TS Lombard, said that the talks could ultimately prove to be a “win-win for European defense stocks” and advised investors to “buy on that weakness.”

Trump-Putin talks a 'win-win' for European defense stocks, TS Lombard says

Granville said if the peace process fails, there would still be a need to replenish depleted arms inventories of U.S. and Europe, which “would be very good for orders and procurement for Rheinmetall and all the other European defense stocks.”

“Or if there is a peace agreement, what do we see? We see a very powerful Russian military which — although the words ‘victory’ and ‘defeat’ will be banded around and should probably not be used — has to an extent prevailed. That reality will force continued increase defense procurement by European governments, and it’s also good for European defense stocks. Either way, it’s a winner,” Granville told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe.”

“The market, of course, has been discounting this some from time to time and as those [defense stock] names pull back a bit, you should buy on that weakness, in my opinion.”

Economics

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

Published

on

UK Has a New Prime Minister Without a General Election

On July 20, Andy Burnham has been chosen to be the next Prime Minister in UK. The appointment of a new Prime Minister in the United Kingdom often raises questions from people outside the country, especially when no nationwide election has taken place. Many wonder how a new national leader can assume office without voters casting ballots. The answer lies in the UK’s parliamentary system, where the Prime Minister is not directly elected by the public but is instead chosen based on who commands the confidence of the House of Commons.

How the UK Selects Its Prime Minister

Unlike presidential systems where citizens vote directly for the head of government, the United Kingdom elects Members of Parliament (MPs) during a general election. The political party that secures a majority of seats in the House of Commons usually forms the government, and that party selects its own leader to serve as Prime Minister.

If the leader resigns, becomes unable to continue, or is replaced by their party, the governing party can choose a new leader without triggering a general election. As long as the new leader is able to maintain the confidence of Parliament, they can immediately become Prime Minister after being formally appointed by the monarch.

Why No Election Was Required

A general election is not automatically required every time the office of Prime Minister changes hands. The governing party retains its parliamentary majority because voters elected MPs rather than an individual Prime Minister. If the ruling party chooses a new leader through its internal leadership process, the government continues to operate without interruption.

This constitutional arrangement provides stability and allows the government to continue functioning during periods of political transition. It also avoids the expense and disruption of holding a nationwide election every time party leadership changes.

The King’s Constitutional Role

After a governing party elects a new leader, the monarch invites that individual to form a government. This constitutional step is largely ceremonial and follows long-established conventions. The King appoints the person most likely to command a majority in the House of Commons, ensuring continuity of government.

Although the monarch formally appoints the Prime Minister, political power rests with Parliament and the elected representatives of the British people.

Could an Election Still Happen?

Yes. A newly appointed Prime Minister has the authority to request a general election if they believe it is politically advantageous or if they seek a stronger public mandate. Parliament can also reach a point where a government loses the confidence of the House of Commons, potentially leading to an election or the formation of a new government.

In many cases, however, a new Prime Minister continues governing until the next scheduled general election.

What This Means for the UK

The UK’s parliamentary democracy is designed to ensure government continuity while respecting the results of the most recent general election. Leadership changes within the governing party do not automatically alter the composition of Parliament, which is why a new Prime Minister can take office without another nationwide vote.

Understanding this process helps explain why political transitions in the United Kingdom can appear different from those in countries with presidential systems. While the Prime Minister may change, the democratic mandate of Parliament remains in place until voters elect a new House of Commons at the next general election.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Grid Upgrades Reshape Macro Economics

Published

on

Global grid upgrades reshape macro economics

On July 21, 2026, global economic analysis shifts focus toward a defining structural macroeconomic trend: the massive expansion of public and private capital deployment into high-capacity electrical grid infrastructure. As industrial electrification, automated data center hubs, and renewable energy integration accelerate worldwide, sovereign governments and institutional investors are facing a monumental economic challenge. Updating legacy power grids to meet skyrocketing demand has emerged as a primary driver of long-term capital expenditures and industrial productivity across both developed and emerging market economies.

According to international economic policy updates released this week, grid infrastructure investments are projected to exceed multi-trillion-dollar thresholds over the coming decade. Economic planners caution that without modernized, high-voltage transmission networks, regional manufacturing sectors face severe energy bottlenecks, localized power price volatility, and operational constraints. Consequently, infrastructure spending is rapidly transitioning from passive utility maintenance into a vital component of national economic competitiveness and industrial policy.

The macroeconomic ripple effects of this capital deployment are being felt across global commodity markets and labor networks. High demand for structural industrial inputs—such as copper, aluminum, specialized electrical steel, and high-capacity transformers—has created sustained pricing support for critical material producers. Simultaneously, the specialized technical labor required to manufacture and deploy modern grid hardware is driving wage growth in industrial sectors, adding a complex new layer to central bank disinflation trajectories.

For global policymakers and strategic investors, the economics of energy grid modernization represent a double-edged sword. While massive infrastructure investment boosts short-term gross domestic product (GDP) and strengthens domestic industrial foundations, it requires disciplined fiscal allocation to prevent inflationary crowding-out of private capital. Countries that efficiently streamline grid infrastructure permitting and mobilize private investment will secure lower long-term energy costs, attracting high-tech manufacturing and reinforcing sustainable economic growth.

Continue Reading

Economics

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

Published

on

Global Trade Realignment and Supply Chains in 2026

The international trade architecture entering the second half of 2026 is undergoing a profound structural pivot. As major sovereign economic blocs adjust to the long-term impact of unilateral tariffs and escalating regional subsidies, traditional globalized supply chains are being rapidly replaced by bilateral trade corridors and regional alliance networks. Data released in late July 2026 highlights a significant divergence: while cross-continental freight volumes between non-aligned partners have cooled, intra-regional trade throughout North America, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe has surged to record levels. This shift reflects a broader macroeconomic strategy wherein multinational corporations prioritize geopolitical resilience over pure cost minimization.

The primary economic catalyst behind this regionalization is the proliferation of sector-specific tariffs targeting critical industries, notably battery components, clean energy technology, and advanced semiconductor hardware. In response, global manufacturers have adopted multi-tier sourcing models that distribute production across intermediate partner nations before final assembly. While this strategy successfully bypasses primary import duties, it adds structural layers of logistical complexity and administrative oversight. Economists note that while total output remains robust, aggregate production costs have drifted upward, contributing to persistent baseline inflation across major consumer markets.

Simultaneously, currency settlement patterns within these regional blocs are experiencing a notable transformation. Sovereign central banks and commercial institutions are increasingly utilizing localized currency swap lines and digital clearing mechanisms to settle cross-border trade transactions. This transition reduces direct exposure to foreign exchange volatility and mitigates third-party liquidity constraints, further solidifying regional economic cohesion. However, for developing economies situated outside these primary trading alliances, the tightening of international trade networks presents severe challenges, restricting access to key export markets and foreign direct investment.

For corporate strategists and policy analysts navigating late 2026, success requires a thorough understanding of these emerging trade corridors. Organizations must conduct regular risk assessments of their multi-tier supplier networks, model tariff sensitivities under shifting geopolitical scenarios, and invest in real-time supply chain telemetry. As regional economic blocs strengthen their regulatory borders, supply chain agility and compliance fortitude will distinguish market leaders from vulnerable enterprises in the evolving global economy.

Continue Reading

Trending