Arab

Amid considerable uncertainty over global economic growth, the prospect of higher interest rates and long-term government bond yields, and volatile energy prices, business activity worldwide has come under pressure.

Trade disruptions resulting from higher customs duties, supply chain disruptions caused by geopolitical conflicts, and mounting challenges facing major international institutions have further compounded these pressures.

These conditions underscore the need for resilient businesses that are not only financially strong but also supported by robust supply chains and capable of navigating challenging market conditions.

Against this backdrop, mergers and acquisitions have emerged as powerful drivers of growth, competitiveness and economic transformation. Yet their success depends on far more than agreeing on valuations and commercial terms. Regulatory complexity, cultural integration, corporate governance, due diligence, and the alignment of people and strategy can ultimately determine whether a transaction creates lasting value or falls short of its objectives.

Global M&A activity strengthened significantly in 2025, with announced deal value reaching approximately SR17.3 trillion ($4.6 trillion), an increase of 49 percent from 2024 and the strongest annual performance since 2021.

Saudi Arabia also recorded substantial transaction activity. The General Authority for Competition, which originated as the Competition Council in 2004, received 427 economic concentration applications valued at approximately SR2 trillion in 2025. It issued a record 269 no-objection decisions, up 33 percent from 2024.

Several major transactions illustrate the growing role of M&A in Saudi Arabia’s economic transformation. In the financial sector, the 2021 merger of the National Commercial Bank and Samba Financial Group created Saudi National Bank, combining two leading institutions to achieve greater scale, operational efficiency and competitiveness.

In the industrial sector, Saudi Aramco completed its $69.1 billion acquisition of a 70 percent stake in SABIC from the Public Investment Fund. Together, these transactions demonstrate how M&A can help consolidate industries, achieve economies of scale, integrate supply chains, develop strategic capabilities and support the Kingdom’s economic diversification objectives.

Against this backdrop, the Riyadh Chamber organized the “Legal Aspects of Corporate Mergers and Acquisitions and Investment Opportunities Forum” on Aug. 31, bringing together representatives from public- and private-sector entities.

The forum provided a valuable platform for regulators, investors, business leaders, legal advisers, compliance officers, board members, governance professionals and SMEs to exchange perspectives, enhance regulatory awareness and explore ways to reduce transaction risks and support sustainable corporate growth in line with Saudi Vision 2030.

I had the privilege of moderating the forum’s third session, titled “The Regulatory and Supervisory Framework for Mergers and Acquisitions in the Kingdom.” The session examined the role of regulatory authorities in reviewing M&A transactions and promoting competition, the regulatory framework governing transactions involving listed companies, and the support provided by relevant authorities for investment deals. It also explored M&A as a strategic tool for driving the growth and long-term sustainability of small and medium-sized enterprises.

Ultimately, an M&A transaction should not be pursued simply to achieve expansion or increase market share. Companies should first establish a clear strategic rationale and determine whether the transaction can create sustainable economic value, improve operational efficiency, foster innovation, strengthen competitiveness and build more resilient supply chains.

Expected synergies should be realistic, measurable and supported by a credible post-transaction integration plan.

Thorough due diligence is equally important. It should extend beyond financial performance and valuation to cover legal obligations, regulatory approvals, tax exposure, operational risks, contractual commitments, governance arrangements, workforce implications, corporate culture, cybersecurity, data protection, intellectual property, and environmental and social responsibilities.

Companies should also assess whether they have the financial and managerial capacity to complete the transaction and integrate the businesses effectively without disrupting existing operations.

Particular attention must be paid to the transaction’s impact on market competition. A deal that creates economic value for the parties involved may nevertheless harm consumers or the broader market if it creates or reinforces a dominant position, restricts market access, raises barriers to entry, reduces consumer choice or weakens competitive pricing.

Early engagement with relevant regulatory authorities can help identify such concerns, clarify notification and approval requirements, and reduce the risk of delays or legal challenges.

Supply chain considerations should also form part of the assessment. While an M&A transaction may improve security of supply, increase access to essential inputs and reduce operational vulnerabilities, companies must ensure that it does not create excessive dependence on a single supplier, market, technology or distribution channel.

Ultimately, a successful M&A transaction requires more than regulatory approval and financial completion. It should deliver tangible and sustainable benefits to shareholders, employees, customers and the wider economy.

Clear governance, transparent decision-making, full compliance with the applicable legal and regulatory framework, and continuous monitoring of post-transaction outcomes are therefore essential to ensuring that a deal achieves its strategic objectives while supporting fair competition and long-term market development.

X: @TalatHafiz

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has found that the networking technology company Cisco may have violated the civil rights of Middle Eastern and Muslim employees amid a wave of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim comments on internal messaging platforms at the company.

In June, the EEOC, which is tasked with enforcing the US’s anti-discrimination laws, said Cisco subjected its employees to a hostile work environment, according to a letter of determination obtained by Al Jazeera.

The letter, which was first reported by Politico Pro, stemmed from a complaint filed with the EEOC in December 2024 by a group of Cisco employees called “Bridge to Humanity” (B2H), who had been voicing concerns that the company’s technology was provided to the Israeli military for use in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Several months earlier, the group of employees had sent a separate open letter calling on the San Jose, California-based company to stop providing its technology to the Israeli government. The document was signed by more than 1,700 of the company’s more than 86,000 employees.

In its December complaint filed with the EEOC, the employees alleged that Cisco had removed the open letter from an internal site and that it was “under review”, and that subsequently, many of the signatories were harassed. Among the allegations was a remark that one employee had told another to “quit living”.

The employees also alleged that Cisco had not responded to their complaints until they created a 76-page report cataloguing the hate comments they had been subjected to in an internal messaging group called Connected Jewish Network.

The report, which was provided to Cisco’s Employee Relations and Ethics offices, according to documents made public by The Guardian, outlined the waves of hate comments. In one of these, from November 2023, an unnamed employee had said that “Israeli passersby killed 2 members of a Palestinian family in Jerusalem this morning, and I for one am extremely grateful.”

“These Cisconians have, among other things, repeatedly glorified violence, joked about sending people to their deaths, likened Palestinians and those with opposing viewpoints to animals, labeled Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims as murderous, violent terrorists, joked about respecting a person’s gender identity,” the 76-page report said. It added that the Connected Jewish Network was not even a “safe space for all of our Jewish colleagues”.

The EEOC’s determination said that the company had retaliated against one unnamed staffer for “her involvement in pro-Palestine efforts by terminating the individual”.

‘Important step’

The employees’ complaint with the EEOC was filed by Legal Aid at Work, a nonprofit legal services organisation.

“The EEOC’s determination is particularly significant because it appears to be the first time in any legal context where a governmental or judicial finding has sided with Big Tech workers who have collectively organised to fight for corporate accountability around their employers’ sales of their technology to Israel,” Christopher Ho, director of the national origin and immigrants’ rights programme at Legal Aid at Work, told Al Jazeera.

Advocacy groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) praised the decision.

“The EEOC’s finding is an important step toward accountability and a reminder that federal civil rights protections apply equally to Muslim, Arab, Palestinian, and other employees who speak out about Palestine,” civil rights managing lawyer Jeffrey Wang at CAIR’s San Francisco Bay-area chapter said in a statement.

“Employers have a legal responsibility to address harassment and discrimination fairly and consistently. Workers should not have to fear retaliation or a hostile work environment because of their religion, national origin, or association with protected communities.”

According to reporting by The Guardian, although the EEOC issues its determination in June, the agency’s mediation with the company has “not gone anywhere”.

Legal Aid at Work told Al Jazeera that it has also submitted a complaint against Cisco to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the California Labor Commissioner.

“[The complaints] allege, respectively, that Cisco unlawfully interfered with our clients’ federally protected right to engage in concerted activity to improve working conditions, and unlawfully interfered with their right to engage in political activities that is protected by the California Labor Code. Both these complaints are still pending at the respective agencies,” Ho said.

Al Jazeera reached out to the EEOC for comment.

“Under federal law, both charges filed with, and charge inquiries made to the EEOC are confidential. The EEOC can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any charge or charge inquiry,” an EEOC spokesperson said.

Cisco did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

The Iran war is settling into attrition, with no regime collapse and Gulf economies facing growing uncertainty

Analysts broadly agree the United States and Israel’s war on Iran will not see regime collapse in Tehran or a definite victory for Washington, but rather a dragged-out affair of stagnation and attrition.

The hope among the US leadership at the start of the war, which began after surprise Israeli and US attacks on February 28, was that mounting economic and military pressure on Iran would force a structural shift in Tehran. Six months on, it is clear this vision will not come about, and instead many are preparing for a protracted war and managed fallout.

Oil-dependent economies are still absorbing supply shocks after traffic in the Strait of Hormuz slowed to a trickle of pre-war levels following Iran’s attacks on shipping and a US blockade on Iranian ports.

The US military is still entrenched in a region that remains its most militarised in years. Although the war’s intensity has lessened since a memorandum of understanding (MoU) was signed by Washington and Tehran in June, there is no sign it will conclude, leading to continued uncertainty about the future.

Existing tensions, such as those between the Houthi rebels and Saudi Arabia in Yemen, look only set to increase as the war drags on. The influence of rival powers, such as those of India and China, remains stalled rather than stopped, with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative having already established itself within the Middle East and North Africa. All in all, the region remains in flux where formal alliances with outside powers no longer guarantee safety.

The defence agreement between Turkiye, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia recently signed in Mecca will likely be the first of many such military pacts agreed in the region.

“The war has just accelerated trends, but hasn’t really started anything that wasn’t already under way. The Gulf countries were already diversifying their economies,” Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House, told Al Jazeera. “Many were already looking at broadening their defence partnerships beyond existing US security guarantees, as well as increasing their own defence capability.”

Israel, for its part, is still pursuing its regional project of “paramountcy”, HA Hellyer of the Royal United Services Institute said, despite its failure to bring Iran to its knees this year.

“There is no chance of the government in Tehran falling in the next six months,” Hellyer told Al Jazeera. “If everything were to theoretically stay the same … with just increased economic pressure, that could eventually cause a ripple effect that could lead to state collapse in Iran. But we’re talking years, not months, and everything is not likely to stay the same.”

The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz and strikes on regional cities have hindered Gulf states’ plans to use oil revenues as an engine to diversify their economies and build on their reputations as a safe haven to encourage investors.

Shipments of oil, derivative products and liquefied natural gas (LNG) have been repeatedly and severely disrupted since the US and Israel launched their attacks on Iran in February.

Transit through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, which saw attacks on shipping by the Houthis during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, became even more hazardous in July, when the Iran-allied Houthis declared a naval blockade of Saudi Arabia.

“The price of oil has increased broadly in line with the Gulf states’ difficulties in exporting it,” John Sfakianakis, chief economist at the Gulf Research Center, told Al Jazeera. “Is this going to go for six months? Is it going to go on for longer?”

Exacerbating the Gulf states’ difficulties is that, although the price of oil has risen, so has inflation. In addition to the economic difficulties the war has created, there is also growing pressure for Gulf states to invest more in defence.

For now, the majority of the states caught in the middle will look at ways of living with the turmoil and managing the consequences.