profits

European markets rise, oil prices jump on OPEC+ decision

European benchmarks began the week with gains. Oil and gold prices increased, but the euro weakened against the dollar. Sentiment was influenced by OPEC+’s decision to pause production hikes in the first quarter of next year, which led to a modest rise in oil prices as fears of oversupply eased. Gains were, however, mostly lost by late morning.

The international benchmark, Brent crude futures, traded at $64.76, while US West Texas Intermediate cost $60.92 a barrel.

Alongside pauses in the new year, OPEC+ countries agreed on Sunday to increase output by a small 137,000 barrels per day in December, maintaining the pace set for October and November.

Meanwhile, investors expect fresh Western sanctions on Russia, targeting Rosneft and Lukoil, to hinder the country’s ability to boost production further.

At the same time, major Western oil companies are benefitting from the disrupted supply of Russian refined fuels due to attacks and sanctions. Refining margins have risen substantially, giving the oil majors a boost. Both BP and Shell share prices were slightly up on Monday before noon in Europe.

“The decision by producers’ cartel OPEC+ to pause further output hikes at the start of next year, amid concerns about a glut of supply, helped give oil prices a lift and, in turn, boosted UK market heavyweights BP and Shell,” said AJ Bell investment director Russ Mould.

The movements also came as BP announced it had agreed to divest stakes in US shale assets to Sixth Street investment firm on Monday.

Winners in Europe

At 11:00 CET, the UK’s FTSE 100 was up by a few points. The DAX in Frankfurt was leading the gains, up 0.8% after an initial stutter. The CAC 40 in Paris started climbing, reaching gains of nearly 0.2%. The lift in France came despite national budget uncertainties and the release of negative PMI data, which showed that the country’s manufacturing sector was still contracting in October.

US futures were positive around the same time, rising between 0.1% and 0.5%.

Meanwhile, the earnings season continues. A number of European companies are reporting this week, including AstraZeneca, BP, BMW, and Commerzbank.

Ryanair opened the week by posting stronger-than-expected results for the first half of its financial year, spanning April to September. Revenues rose 13% to €9.82bn, as traffic grew 3% and fares increased by 13%. Over the same period, profit rose by 42% year-on-year to €2.54bn, driven by a strong Easter season.

The airline’s shares were up 2.90% in Dublin at around midday.

Looking ahead, Ryanair’s outspoken CEO Michael O’Leary criticised countries in Europe where airlines face high taxes, including environmental duties. In an interview with CNBC, he threatened to move capacity outside the UK should the new budget include such a levy.

“Ryanair is also one of several airline operators with an eagle eye on taxes and costs. It is no longer putting up with unfavourable tax systems, preferring to switch flights and routes to less punitive locations,” Mould commented.

In other markets, the euro weakened against the US dollar by more than 0.2%, hitting a rate of $1.1517 by 11:00 CET. At the same time, the Japanese yen and the British pound were also losing ground against the greenback, with the dollar trading at ¥154.15 and the pound costing $1.3136.

Gold traded just above $4,000, rising slightly by 0.3%.

Source link

Italy’s UniCredit sees record profits as Commerzbank advance drags on

Published on
22/10/2025 – 14:33 GMT+2

Italian banking group UniCredit has delivered a robust third quarter, underscoring its position as one of Europe’s stronger lenders.

“UniCredit delivered yet another set of record results, with net revenues up 1.2% and costs down 0.1% versus last year,” said CEO Andrea Orcel in a statement.

Net profit came in at €2.6 billion in the third quarter, up 4.7% year-on-year, and above a company estimate of €2.4bn.

Over the first nine months of the year, the bank’s net profits rose by 12.9% to €8.7bn.

“These results reflect disciplined execution, and I am confident that we will continue to build sustainable value for all stakeholders,” said Orcel.

UniCredit also reaffirmed full-year 2025 net profit guidance at €10.5bn and said it planned to distribute at least €9.5bn to shareholders.

Why this matters

In a European banking sector facing low growth, investor pressure, and regulatory hurdles, the results are significant for several reasons.

First, UniCredit’s combination of revenue growth, cost control, and low credit impairments suggests a resilience not always seen among its peers.

Second, the reaffirmation of strong guidance signals management confidence in execution through to year-end despite macroeconomic uncertainties in European and global markets.

Thirdly, the capital position and shareholder-return commitments indicate that the bank is in a position to manage risk and reward investors.

Europe’s banks are navigating reduced margins, regulatory costs, and lacklustre loan demand. Against that backdrop, UniCredit’s cost-income ratio of 37% in the quarter is a standout.

The lender also noted that its medium-term ambitions remain unchanged, standing by a net profit target of above €11 billion for the full-year 2027.

What to watch

Key to delivery will be how UniCredit handles a potential slowdown in areas such as net interest income, which fell 5.4% year-on-year in the quarter, and how it sustains its cost-efficiency edge.

The impact of wider economic weakness in Italy, Germany, and Central and Eastern Europe, all countries with strong UniCredit presence, remains a risk.

Additionally, conversion of its medium-term plans into reality will require continued disciplined execution. This is especially the case as the bank pursues strategic initiatives such as life insurance policy changes in Italy and its takeover of Commerzbank.

UniCredit has built a 26% stake in the German lender over the last year, although Orcel’s advances are facing fierce opposition from the government in Berlin.

Source link

California energy regulators pause efforts to penalize oil companies for high profits

California energy regulators Friday put the brakes on plans requiring oil companies to pay a penalty if their profits climb too high, a temporary win for the fossil fuel industry two years after the governor declared the state had “finally beat big oil.”

The postponement by the California Energy Commission until 2030 comes after two oil refineries accounting for roughly 18% of the state’s refining capacity announced their plans to close in the coming months. The commission has the power to implement a penalty but has not done so since it was given that authority in 2023.

The penalty was considered a landmark piece of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s government and the state’s ambitious goals to curb climate change. The state faces challenges in its efforts to take on the oil industry while ensuring a stable and affordable fuel supply. His administration is also proposing to temporarily streamline approvals of new oil wells in existing oil fields in an effort to maintain a stable fuel supply.

Siva Gunda, the commission’s vice chair, said the state is not “walking back” its efforts to wean itself off fossil fuels but must prioritize protecting consumers at the gas pump.

“I personally truly believe that this pause will be beneficial to ensure that this mid-transition is smooth,” he said.

The commission still plans to set rules that would require oil refineries to keep a minimum level of fuel on hand to avoid shortages when refineries go offline for maintenance.

Jamie Court, the president of Consumer Watchdog who supported the law, said the energy commission’s vote is “basically a giveaway to the industry.”

“I’m really disheartened and disgusted by Newsom,” he said. “I feel like this is just a total about-face. And in the end it’s going to result in greater price spikes.”

But the Western States Petroleum Association recommended that the state postpone a penalty for 20 years.

“While today’s action by the CEC stopped short of a full statutory repeal or a 20-year pause, it represents a needed step to provide some certainty for California’s fuels market,” CEO Catherine Reheis-Boyd said in a statement. “The vote demonstrates the CEC’s understanding that imposing this failed policy would have likely exacerbated investment concerns contributing to California’s recent refinery closures.”

In 2022, Newsom called the Legislature into a special session to pass a law aimed at holding oil companies accountable for making too much money after a summer of record-high gas prices in California. The governor signed a law the following year authorizing the energy commission to penalize oil companies for excessive profits.

The law also required oil companies to report more data on their operations to the state. It created an independent division at the commission to oversee the oil and gas industry and provide guidance to the state on its energy transition.

Newsom’s office thanked the energy commission for voting to postpone implementing a penalty, saying it was a “prudent step” toward stabilizing the oil market.

“When Governor Newsom signed this legislation two years ago, he promised that we would utilize the new transparency tools to look under the hood of our oil and gas market that had been a black box for decades,” spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor said in a statement. “We did exactly that.”

Julia Stein, deputy director of a climate institute at UCLA School of Law, said state officials are still intent on advancing their efforts to transition away from fossil fuels.

“But I think there is also a sense at the state level that we’re entering a different phase of the transition where some of these problems are going to be presented more acutely,” she said. “And folks are kind of now trying to understand how they’re going to approach that in real time.”

California has the highest gas prices in the nation, largely due to taxes and environmental regulations. Regular unleaded gas prices were $4.59 a gallon Friday, compared to a national average of $3.20, according to AAA.

The commission has not determined what would count as an excessive profit under the policy.

Setting a penalty could be risky for the state because it could unintentionally discourage production and drive prices up, said Severin Borenstein, an economist and public policy professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

“It’s pretty clear they are shifting towards more focus on affordability and recognition that the high prices in California may not be associated with the actual refinery operations,” he said of state officials.

Austin writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Restaurants’ profits soar as self-service tills take over

BRITAIN’S top restaurant chains have seen profits soar by almost a fifth after replacing staff with ­self-service tills and apps.

They hit £365million at the top 100 groups this year, up from £308million in 2024.

Accountancy group UHY Hacker Young also found that turnover was up 19 per cent to £12.9billion, from £10.8billion.

It said growth had been particularly strong for the fast food and casual dining sector, with burger and steakhouse chains enjoying some of the largest turnover increases.

UHY Hacker Young partner Martin Jones said chains had been investing in technology such as touchscreen tills in fast-food outlets.

Many had also upgraded menu offerings to increase prices, as a way of boosting earnings.

He said: “While many chains are still suffering from depressed margins and weak demand, there’s enough innovation and expansion to deliver better results.”

Hospitality has been particularly hard-hit by the increase in employers’ National Insurance.

Half of all job losses since the Budget have been in that sector, according to ­analysis of data from the Office for National Statistics by UKHospitality.

It means one in every 25 jobs in pubs, hotels, cafes, restaurants and bars has been axed.

Crowds of people using self-service kiosks at a McDonald's.

1

Britain’s top restaurant chains have seen profits soar by almost a fifth after replacing staff with ­self-service tills and appsCredit: Getty

T&C’s ARE KAFKA-ESQUE

BANKS and insurance firms need to stop writing terms and conditions that are “longer than some classic novels”, campaigners urge.

Policies on travel insurance and investment products are the worst, clocking in at 26,000 words — around the same length as Franz Kafka’s Metamorphosis, analysis by Fairer Finance claims.

It comes despite the financial regulator in 2023 introducing rules forcing firms to prove that customers understand such documents.

Fairer Finance said the longer the documents were, the less likely customers were to know what they mean — or to engage with them at all.

Managing director James Daley added: “The grace period is now over, and we expect the regulator to start holding companies to account.”

ENERGY CRISIS

HOUSEHOLDS cannot afford more energy price hikes, the regulator has been warned.

More than 12 million people are struggling to pay already — but Ofgem is expected to announce tomorrow a rise in the energy price cap to £1,737 from October.

Commenting on the research from York University, Simon Francis of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, said: “The time for tinkering with the price cap is over.”

RENT CONS UP

RENTERS have been warned to watch out for fake landlord scams after crooks made £20million from them last year.

The average victim lost £4,711, Action Fraud said. The total haul was up by 45 per cent on the previous year.

Richard Daniels, of TSB, said: “Scammers prey on a competitive rental market with too-good-to-be-true listings that trick house- hunters into making advanced payments.”

Source link

Pop Mart shares rise 12% as Labubu maker announces stellar profits and new doll

Published on
20/08/2025 – 13:13 GMT+2


ADVERTISEMENT

Shares in Pop Mart soared over 12.5% in daily trading in Hong Kong on Wednesday after the Chinese company released stellar earnings.

The creator of the Labubu doll saw its revenue jump 204% year-on-year in the first half of 2025, coming in at 13.88 billion yuan (€1.66bn). Net profit soared 386% to 4.68bn yuan (€559.39 million), beating forecasts.

Around 40% of sales were made up by purchases outside of mainland China thanks to the international appeal of the firm’s Labubu brand, part of its “The Monsters” range.

“The Monsters” brought in 4.81bn yuan (€574.99mn) in the first half of the year, accounting for 34.7% of total revenue.

The elf-like dolls have become a viral sensation, boosted by the endorsement of celebrities like Dua Lipa, Kim Kardashian and David Beckham.

Part of the attraction is that the toys are sold in blind-box packaging. This means that customers don’t know what they have purchased until they open the product.

Although the firm was created back in 2010, Pop Mart launched its first blind-box series in 2016. The popularity of the range allowed the company to list in Hong Kong in December 2020, achieving a market capitalisation of around €6bn. Since the IPO, shares have risen by over 300%.

Pop Mart opened its first European store in London in January 2022, hoping to expand in overseas markets. Today, the company operates around 2,600 vending machines and almost 600 stores across the globe, meaning Labubu dolls can be bought in more than 30 countries. 

Given the demand for dolls, Pop Mart is now considering expansion in the Middle East, Central Europe, and Central and South America. The firm operates around 40 stores in the US, with 10 more sites expected to open by the end of 2025.

In an earnings call on Wednesday, CEO Wang Ning also said that Pop Mart would this week launch a new, mini version of Labubu that can be attached to phones.

Wang added that his firm was on track to meet its 2025 revenue goal of 20bn yuan (€2.39bn), noting that “30bn this year should also be quite easy”.

Some analysts have nonetheless raised doubts over the sustainability of the company’s rise, driven by social media sites like TikTok.

“The craze for the elf-like Labubu dolls is translating into big profit and cash flow,” said AJ Bell head of financial analysis, Danni Hewson. ““Consumers can be capricious when it comes to this type of fad though and Pop Mart will have to work hard to build on this success if it is to avoid being a one-hit wonder.”

Source link

Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway reports 3.8% decline in profits

Aug. 2 (UPI) — Berkshire Hathaway on Saturday reported a 3.79% decline in second-quarter earnings as CEO Warren Buffett‘s company warned about troubling times because of President Donald Trump‘s tariffs on imported goods.

Buffett, who has been involved with the company for 60 years, owns about 15.1% of its economic interest and 31.2% of its voting interest as its largest shareholder.

The public company reported an operating profit of $11.16 billion, with a lower number from a decline in its assets, which include insurance underwriting for Geico. The first-half decline was 8.8% at $20.8 billion.

Net income in the second quarter dropped to $12.37 billion, which is a 59% slump from the second quarter last year.

Trump in April imposed a baseline tariff of 10% on most trading partners with high duties in place or coming on Friday.

“Considerable uncertainty remains as to the ultimate outcome of these events,” the company said in its filing. “We are currently unable to reliably predict the ultimate impact on our businesses, whether through changes in the availability of products, supply chain costs and efficiency, and customer demand for our products and services. It is reasonably possible there could be adverse consequences on most, if not all, of our operating businesses, as well as on our investments in equity securities, which could significantly affect our future results.”

The company said its financials already were impacted.

“The pace of changes in these events, including tensions from developing international trade policies and tariffs, accelerated through the first six months of 2025,” Berkshire said.

Pre-tax underwriting losses before foreign currency effects were $276 million in the first six months this year, compared with $299 million in 2024, the company reported.

Berkshire encountered a $1.1 billion payout from the Southern California wildfires in January. There were no significant catastrophic events in the first six months of 2024.

But higher profits did roll in for the company’s railroad, manufacturing, service and retail holdings, CNBC reported. Also, its energy company, Berkshire Hathaway Energy, had an 18% rise in net income.

The company reported revenue of $182.24 billion for the first six months compared with $183.52 the previous year. Second-quarter revenue was 92.15 billion, with 93.7 billion in 2024.

Berkshire Hathaway wrote down a loss of $3.8 billion from a stake in Kraft Heinz and is considering a spinoff for the food giant, of which it owns owns 27.4% in stock.

Berkshire Hathaway has $344.09 billion in cash, equivalents and short-term securities.

“Despite what some commentators currently view as an extraordinary cash position at Berkshire, the great majority of your money remains in equities. That preference won’t change,” Buffett wrote in his annual 15-page letter in February.

The company did not re-purchase any stock during the first half of this year.

“Berkshire’s common stock repurchase program permits Berkshire to repurchase its shares any time that Warren Buffett … believes that the repurchase price is below Berkshire’s intrinsic value, conservatively determined,” the company said in the filing.

Berkshire Hathaway filed its first earnings report since the 94-year-old Buffett announced he will depart as CEO at the end of the year, but will remain as chairman of the board. Greg Abel, who is the company’s vice president of non-insurance operations, will become the new CEO.

Buffett is the ninth richest person in the world with a net worth $141.7 billion through Saturday, according to Forbes, and is known as the Oracle of Omaha, which refers to the Nebraska city where Berkshire is headquartered and he has lived his entire life.

Berkshire Hathaway traces its roots to 1839 as Valley Falls Company, a textile manufacturer in New England, before mergers with Hathaway Manufacturing Company in 1888 and Berkshire Fine Spinning Associates in 1929.

The company was “mired in a terrible business,” according to Buffett, and he purchased his first shares of Berkshire in December 1962.

The company’s market capitalization is now $1.01 trillion.

Shares ended trading Friday at $472.84. This year, the all-time high has been $539.80 on May 4, while the 2025 low was $442.66 on Jan. 10. The company began trading in 1996 at $22.20. Class A shares have never undergone a stock split.

In a message, Buffett wrote: “You probably know that I don’t make stock recommendations. However, I have two thoughts regarding your personal expenditures that can save you real money. I’m suggesting that you call on the services of two subsidiaries of Berkshire: GEICO and Borsheim’s.”

He noted savings on Geico for auto insurance and Borsheim fine jewelry, watches and giftware “almost certainly will cost you less.”

Source link

The night divers seeking sea cucumbers and profits off West Africa’s coast | Environment

Banana Islands, Sierra Leone – As the sun dips below the horizon, Emmanuel Pratt tugs a worn cord and the outboard engine sputters to life. His wooden canoe, painted in white and faded blue, cuts through the darkening waters. Fruit bats screech overhead.

Pratt, 35, is a seasoned sea cucumber diver from the Banana Islands – an archipelago home to about 500 people in Sierra Leone. For 15 years, he has made a living scouring the ocean floor for these creatures that resemble warty, oversized sea slugs. They hide in the silt by day and emerge at night to inch across the ocean floor, gobbling up decomposing matter.

Also on the canoe, 25-year-old Omolade Jones – sweating in a half-zipped-up wetsuit – perches on the edge of the boat and gazes out at the dark water.

After 10 minutes, the younger diver gestures at Pratt to cut the engine and readies himself to dive. Jones blows on his mask, grabs an underwater torch and wraps a breathing hose around his waist.

The seabed surrounding the small, jungle-coated archipelago used to teem with sea cucumbers. Nowadays, they are scarce and scattered.  Freediving is no longer an option. Pratt and Jones have to dive deeper, for longer, to find their catch.

They have turned to “hookah diving” – a makeshift system where air is pumped from a diesel-powered generator on the boat down through a plastic hose. It is a risky and fragile lifeline. The engines are often old and the air is easily contaminated by diesel fumes. And experts say it is much more dangerous than scuba or free diving.

As the diesel engine that powers his air supply rattles in the boat, Jones quietly slips over the edge into the black water. The yellow hose trails behind him as he swims away from the canoe. Minutes later, his torch lights up a column of water above the seabed.

Pratt sits in the canoe, a cigarette dangling from his lips, his eyes fixed on the spot where Jones’s light is. “The cucumbers are running out,” he says glumly.

While they used to haul in dozens of buckets of sea cucumbers a night, now they struggle to find a handful. Pratt says the divers rarely make more than $40 on a dive – barely enough to cover the costs of fuel or to hire some of the diving equipment.

Not long after Jones exits the boat, he flashes his torch to signal that he is ready to swim back in. When he reaches the canoe, he hoists himself up on the side with his forearms. In one hand, he holds the torch, in the other, a small, brown sea cucumber.

Pratt takes his turn and disappears into the dark water. He surfaces a while later with a sea cucumber. But the divers are unimpressed. After a couple of hours at sea, they head back to the mooring with a meagre catch of just three specimens.

Overhead, the almost-full moon casts a white sheen over the water and dimly illuminates the way home.

Source link

How Israel’s military industry profits from war in Gaza | Gaza News

Author of The Palestine Laboratory joins The Take to discuss Israel’s military-tech industry.

Israel’s war on Gaza has turbocharged its already booming military-tech industry, with weapons and surveillance systems tested on Palestinians continuing to be sold around the world. Israel’s role as a global arms innovator has only deepened since October 7, 2023, and some governments and corporations are profiting.

Source link

Elon Musk’s Dilemma: Between Politics, Profits, And Tesla’s Future

On May 29th, Elon Musk officially stepped down from his role in the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), concluding a 130-day tenure marked by controversy and unmet fiscal goals. His departure follows public criticism of a Republican-backed spending bill that, contrary to DOGE’s mission, significantly increases the federal deficit. This development underscores the complex interplay between political affiliations, corporate responsibilities, and the influence of high-profile individuals on emerging financial markets.

His resignation marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing scrutiny of his leadership and its impact on Tesla. While Musk’s departure from DOGE was intended to refocus attention on Tesla, it has done little to ease growing concerns among investors and the public about his commitment to the company’s core goals of innovation and sustainability. Instead of restoring confidence, the move has highlighted deeper issues within Tesla, as the company continues to struggle with declining sales and mounting reputational challenges. These concerns are compounded by perceptions that Musk’s attention is divided, raising questions about whether he remains fully dedicated to steering Tesla through a critical period of transformation. As a result, his leadership is now under intensified scrutiny, with stakeholders demanding clearer direction and renewed focus on the values that once defined Tesla’s pioneering identity.

Tesla Takedown as a Global Backlash Against Musk

The hashtag #TeslaTakedown trended widely on X (formerly Twitter) and other social media platforms in early 2025, marking a global protest movement targeting Tesla and its founder, Elon Musk. Activists across the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia called for divestment from Tesla by urging individuals and institutions to sell off their vehicles and shares. The movement was sparked by a series of controversial decisions by Musk, most notably his decision to join the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which critics say undermined public trust in Tesla’s independence.

Even before the protest gained global momentum, Tesla was already grappling with unstable corporate performance, particularly in the stock market. In the first quarter of 2025, Tesla ranked among the worst-performing stocks in the S&P 500, with shares losing over a third of their value. This significant decline was largely fueled by public backlash against Musk’s aggressive efficiency policies under DOGE, which disrupted Tesla’s operations. Meanwhile, Tesla’s electric vehicles have struggled to maintain market share amid a surge of Chinese EVs dominating Asian and European markets. This fierce competition has led to weakened demand, production slowdowns, and mass layoffs. The company is currently laying off more than 10% of its global workforce—its largest reduction in four years—underscoring declining sales and the ongoing failure to deliver an affordable EV in the face of a price war with Chinese rivals. In addition, Tesla reported a gross profit margin of just 17.6% in Q4, the lowest in over four years.

Sustainability is a myth to Musk.  

The situation deteriorated further when the United States, under the Trump administration, withdrew from the Paris Agreement, casting fresh doubts on Musk’s environmental commitments, especially given his newly acquired role within the administration. Tesla has long branded itself as a green tech pioneer committed to zero-emission vehicles and the reduction of carbon emissions. The company’s stated goal is to operate fully carbon-neutral factories to help create a more sustainable future. However, this commitment was called into question in 2022 when Tesla was removed from the S&P 500 ESG Index. Established in 2019, the index evaluates companies based on their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards. Tesla’s removal prompted Musk to publicly denounce ESG as a scam, citing examples of tobacco companies receiving higher ESG ratings than Tesla, despite its focus on clean energy innovation. S&P justified the decision by pointing to allegations of racial discrimination and a failure to maintain a healthy workplace environment. In response, Tesla issued a statement reaffirming its commitment to equity and non-discrimination, after which it was eventually reinstated.

Tesla’s ESG Commitment and Consumer Trust

Musk’s dual role as both the head of multiple tech companies and a government bureaucrat places him in a difficult position, torn between saving his company and navigating political criticism. On one hand, Tesla’s poor ESG record with S&P has made Musk skeptical of ESG initiatives; on the other, public trust in Tesla’s electric vehicles, which are projected to play a key role in future sustainable innovation, is at risk. Without substantial reform, the divestment movement could continue to grow. The U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement signals a loosening of domestic environmental policies, including the blocking of EV subsidies, increased fossil fuel production, and a backlash against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Following the U.S. withdrawal, many investors divested from their holdings, indicating a decline in ESG funds, with an estimated outflow of up to 6.1 billion US dollars in the first three months of 2025, after 4.3 billion US dollars had already been withdrawn in the last quarter of 2024.

The U.S. policy towards environmental issues directly contradicts Musk’s goals for Tesla as a leader in sustainable technology and creates serious challenges for the company in fulfilling ESG commitments. Trump’s open support for Musk amid the #TeslaTakedown controversy, even going so far as to call the protests a form of domestic terrorism, has only damaged Tesla’s reputation further. Trump also praised Musk’s budget-cutting measures, especially the termination of DEI-related contracts. This endorsement has triggered a decline in Tesla’s stock and raised investor concerns about Musk’s political entanglements with the Trump administration. Additionally, Tesla’s long history of overpromising and underdelivering, such as missing production targets or releasing products that differ sharply from initial announcements, has damaged its credibility and fueled accusations of greenwashing. Societal skepticism toward Tesla’s commitment to sustainable innovation continues to grow.

Blurred Lines Between Politics and Business

Elon Musk’s resignation from DOGE marks a crucial step toward repairing Tesla’s reputation, which had noticeably declined in early 2025. This move signals a renewed focus on Tesla’s core mission, including the return of customers who had grown skeptical of the company’s commitment to sustainable innovation. It underscores the difficult reality that balancing dual roles as a politician and a business leader is inherently vulnerable to conflicts of interest and that one must be prioritized to meet customer expectations effectively. Musk’s involvement with DOGE indicated that he placed political ambitions, particularly those aligned with Trump, above Tesla’s fundamental goals. Trump’s strong influence shaped policy decisions that reflected his controversial and dismissive approach to criticism, which conflicted with Tesla’s values and threatened the company’s commitment to sustainability.

Sustainable leadership is essential for building authentic commitments that resonate with the public, and the #TeslaTakedown movement serves as a clear wake-up call for Musk. Ultimately, only by drawing a clear line between business and politics can Tesla rebuild public trust, regain its competitive edge, and chart a sustainable path forward.

Source link

Between Principles and Profits: Dutch Foreign Policy Toward the Islamic World

The Netherlands’ relationship with the Islamic world has developed over the centuries, starting from the era of colonialism when the Dutch controlled the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia), where the majority of the population is Muslim. This colonial legacy not only left a historical trace but also influenced the political and economic dynamics of the Netherlands in relation to Islamic countries. In addition, after World War II, the Netherlands received waves of migration from Muslim countries such as Turkey and Morocco, as well as from its former colonies, including Indonesia and Suriname. This led to a significant growth of the Muslim community in the Netherlands, which in turn created complex domestic social and political dynamics.

As a country that upholds the principles of liberal democracy and human rights, the Netherlands actively promotes these values in its foreign policy. This attitude often creates tensions in relations with Islamic countries, especially in issues related to religious freedom, women’s rights, and freedom of expression. For example, the debate over the ban on the burqa and criticism of sharia law in some Islamic countries show a clash between the principles of Dutch liberal democracy and the social norms of Islamic countries. However, on the other hand, the Netherlands also has great economic interests with Islamic countries, particularly in the field of trade and energy investment. Many Islamic countries, especially in the Middle East, are the Netherlands’ main trading partners, both in exports of agricultural products and in energy imports such as oil and gas.

The dilemma arose when the Netherlands had to balance between liberal democratic idealism and economic pragmatism. Criticism of human rights abuses in Islamic countries can risk disrupting trade and investment relations. For example, the diplomatic crisis with Turkey in 2017, in which the Netherlands banned Turkish ministers from campaigning in Rotterdam, reflected the tension between liberal democratic principles and political and economic interests. In addition, the Netherlands’ relations with countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran are often colored by contradictions, where on the one hand the Netherlands denounces their authoritarian policies, but on the other hand maintains close economic cooperation.

This research becomes relevant in understanding how the Netherlands navigates its foreign relations with Islamic countries in the midst of the dilemma between liberal democratic values and economic interests. This study not only contributes to the study of international relations but also provides insight for policymakers in formulating a balanced strategy between the promotion of democratic values and national interests in the context of relations with the Islamic world. Thus, this study aims to examine the dynamics of Dutch foreign policy towards the Islamic world, identify the factors that influence its political decisions, and analyze the impact of the approach used by the Netherlands in maintaining a balance between liberal democracy and economic interests.

The relationship between the Netherlands and the Islamic world has a long history that has been shaped through various political, economic, and social dynamics. Since the 17th century, when the Netherlands became one of the largest maritime and colonial powers, interaction with the Islamic world has occurred, especially through trade and colonial activities in Muslim regions, such as Indonesia. In the 16th century, the Netherlands (which at that time was still part of the Spanish Empire) began to engage in the spice trade with the Islamic world, mainly by sea. Dutch traders explored trade routes controlled by Muslim traders and began to establish relationships with various kingdoms and sultanates in Southeast Asia, such as Aceh, Banten, and Makassar. There were conflicts and rivalries between the Dutch and the Muslim powers, despite favorable trade relations. One example is the Aceh War, which lasted ten years, in which the Dutch sought to control the Muslim sultanate of Aceh, which was very powerful in Sumatra. The history of relations between the Netherlands and the Islamic world is very complicated and full of conflicts. This relationship shows how two different societies interact with each other and shape each other. In addition to conflicts and difficulties, there is cooperation and mutual understanding. To build a better and more peaceful relationship in the future, it is important to understand our history.

The history of relations between the Netherlands and the Islamic world, particularly in Indonesia, reflects complex dynamics involving political, social, and cultural interactions. This relationship began with the arrival of the Dutch at the end of the 16th century and continued until the colonial period, which lasted more than three centuries. The arrival of the Dutch in Indonesia in 1596 was marked by the main goal of controlling the spice trade. Over time, they began to realize the growing power of Islam in the archipelago, especially through the influence of clerics and a strong social network among the Muslim community. The Dutch’s fear of potential resistance from Muslims, especially those connected to the Ottoman Caliphate, prompted them to develop a more strategic policy in dealing with Islam (Amalsyah, 2013).

During the colonial period, the Dutch controlled the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia), where the majority of the population was Muslim. The Dutch colonial policy towards Islam was ambivalent—on the one hand, the colonial government sought to control and limit the influence of Islam in the nationalist movement, but on the other hand, they also worked closely with the local Muslim elite to maintain the stability of the colonial government. This colonial experience still has an impact on Dutch foreign policy towards the Islamic world to this day. In the modern era, the Netherlands’ relations with the Islamic world are growing, especially in economic and diplomatic aspects. The Netherlands has established trade relations with Islamic countries, especially in the energy and infrastructure sectors. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey are major trading partners, while relations with Iran remain complex due to geopolitical factors and international sanctions. 

In many cases, Dutch foreign policy faces a dilemma between economic interests and liberal democratic values. This is especially true in relations with developing countries such as Indonesia. The interaction between past and modern practices demonstrates this dynamic. The Round Table Conference (KMB) in 1949 was an attempt by the Netherlands to strengthen its economic dominance in Indonesia. It regulates Dutch company ownership in strategic areas such as banking and transportation. However, Indonesia’s nationalization policies in 1958, such as the State Commercial Bank and Garuda Indonesia, made the Dutch reconsider their strategy; they shifted from colonial control to economic diplomacy based on equality. Dutch policies combine development aid and trade promotion. For example, the development assistance budget was reduced from 0.7% of GDP to below the international threshold, and the budget was allocated to subsidize SME exports and military operations. This method has been criticized for undermining principles (Bieckmann, 2013).

The Netherlands implemented various policies to supervise and control the lives of Muslims. One of the first steps was the establishment of institutions such as the Priesterraden in 1882 to supervise the religious activities of Muslims. In 1905, strict regulations were enacted requiring permission from the colonial government to teach Islam. Snouck Hurgronje, a Dutch orientalist, played a key role in formulating this policy. He suggested that the government be neutral on the religious aspects of Islam but wary of its political potential. Snouck classifies Islam into two categories: religious and political, with a focus on controlling political aspects that are considered to have the potential to cause rebellion (Effendi, 2013).

In addition to bilateral relations with Muslim countries, domestic dynamics also play an important role. The Netherlands has a significant Muslim population, mainly of Turkish and Moroccan immigrant descent. The presence of this Muslim community is often a domestic political issue, especially in debates about integration, multiculturalism, and immigration policy. Political parties’ attitudes towards Islam at home often influence Dutch foreign policy towards Islamic countries. Against this historical background and contemporary dynamics, Dutch foreign policy towards the Islamic world continues to develop within the framework of a balance between economic interests, liberal democratic values, and domestic and global political dynamics.

The Netherlands faces a dilemma in carrying out its foreign policy towards Islamic countries, where the values of liberal democracy that are upheld often conflict with economic interests. As a country that actively promotes human rights, freedom of opinion, and democracy, the Netherlands has consistently criticized human rights violations in Islamic countries, especially regarding political freedom, women’s rights, and religious freedom. However, on the other hand, economic relations with Islamic countries, especially in the trade, investment, and energy sectors, remain a top priority. The Netherlands is a liberal democracy that strongly defends values such as democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. However, as a country with an open economy that relies heavily on foreign investment and international trade, liberal democratic values often conflict with economic interests in foreign policy.

This tension is evident in various diplomatic situations. One prime example is the Netherlands’ relationship with Turkey, which has experienced ups and downs due to differences in political views. When the Netherlands criticized President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s authoritarian policies and restricted Turkey’s political campaigns in Europe, bilateral relations between the two countries briefly deteriorated. However, economic cooperation continues due to the great trade interests between the two countries. Another case that reflects this dilemma is the relationship between the Netherlands and Saudi Arabia. The Netherlands has often criticized Saudi Arabia’s human rights record, especially regarding freedom of opinion and its treatment of political opposition. However, because Saudi Arabia is one of the Netherlands’ main trading partners in the energy and infrastructure sectors, the Dutch government maintains close economic ties. Even as the Dutch Parliament passed a resolution condemning Saudi Arabia’s involvement in human rights abuses, the government continued to look for ways to maintain a balance between political criticism and economic interests. 

This dilemma is also seen in the Dutch policy towards Iran. International sanctions against Iran, backed by the Netherlands, often collide with the desire of Dutch businessmen to expand trade with the country. The Netherlands must play a cautious diplomatic role in order to remain compliant with the norms of liberal democracy without harming its economic interests. Overall, Dutch foreign policy towards the Islamic world shows the tension between idealism and pragmatism. Although the Netherlands wants to maintain its image as a democratic country that defends human rights, economic interests remain a dominant factor in foreign policy decisions. Therefore, the Netherlands continues to seek balance in its approach by implementing a flexible diplomacy strategy so as not to lose both political influence and economic advantages in the Islamic world. In its foreign policy, the Netherlands has always faced a dilemma between economic interests and liberal democracy. There are no easy solutions, and the Dutch government must continue to strive to find ways to balance the country’s economic interests and its values. The Netherlands can maintain its economic advantages while supporting democracy, human rights, and sustainable development around the world by using innovative and responsible approaches.

The dilemma between liberal democracy and economic interests in Dutch foreign policy towards the Islamic world has various implications, both in bilateral relations, domestic dynamics, and the Netherlands’ position in the international arena. Dutch foreign policy has major consequences at the regional (European) and global levels. These affected areas include the economy, security, environment, and human rights. It is essential to understand these consequences in order to assess how effective the policies are and to plan a better plan for future use. The Netherlands’ free trade policy abroad has increased Dutch exports and investment around the world. This has boosted Dutch economic growth and created more jobs. However, there are risks associated with these policies, such as dependence on certain markets and the possible exploitation of workers in developing countries.

The Netherlands’ foreign policy, which often criticizes democratic and human rights issues in Islamic countries, has the potential to strain diplomatic relations. The case of tensions with Turkey and Saudi Arabia shows that Dutch criticism of political policies in Islamic countries can trigger a harsh response, such as ambassadorial withdrawals or trade restrictions. However, on the other hand, economic pragmatism encourages the Netherlands to maintain trade relations, especially in the energy and infrastructure sectors. 

The Netherlands’ foreign policy towards the Islamic world is also closely related to domestic political dynamics. The growing Muslim population in the Netherlands, especially of Turkish and Moroccan descent, has sparked debates about integration and national identity. The Netherlands is a NATO member that supports global climate action and is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Netherlands also actively participates in NATO military operations and supports the improvement of European defense capabilities. The Netherlands also invests in renewable energy and supports international agreements on climate change. The Netherlands strongly supports human rights. This includes development assistance, diplomacy, and support for civil society institutions that fight for human rights. Political parties with a hardline stance towards Islam often exploit this issue in their political campaigns, which can then influence Dutch foreign policy towards Islamic countries. This attitude also has an effect on immigration policy, where the Netherlands is increasingly selective in accepting immigrants from Islamic countries, especially regarding security issues and social values.

As a member of the European Union, the Netherlands often follows European foreign policy as a whole in dealing with Islamic countries. However, in some cases, the Netherlands has taken a firmer stance than other European countries in criticizing human rights violations. This attitude could strengthen the Netherlands’ position as a country that upholds democratic values but also risks reducing economic access to the markets of Islamic countries. In addition, in international organizations such as the United Nations and the WTO, the Netherlands must maintain a balance between national interests and its commitment to multilateral policies. 

In the future, the Netherlands needs to develop a more flexible foreign policy strategy to manage relations with the Islamic world. Economic diplomacy that maintains democratic principles but with a more pragmatic and dialogical approach can be a solution in avoiding unnecessary diplomatic conflicts. In addition, increased cooperation in the fields of education, culture, and technology can be an alternative way to strengthen relations with Islamic countries without getting too caught up in political conflicts. Taking into account these various aspects, Dutch foreign policy towards the Islamic world will continue to be a challenge that requires a balance between political idealism and economic reality. Economic, security, environmental, and human rights are heavily influenced by Dutch international policies. The Netherlands must adapt its foreign policy to global trends and emerging problems if it wants to meet challenges and seize future opportunities. The Netherlands has the ability to contribute to the development of a safer, more prosperous, and more sustainable world by enhancing partnerships with like-minded countries, increasing investment in diplomacy, supporting international organizations, and protecting human rights.

Dutch foreign policy towards the Islamic world is in tension between liberal democracy and economic interests. As a country that upholds human rights and democratic freedoms, the Netherlands often criticizes political policies in Islamic countries, especially regarding freedom of opinion, women’s rights, and the system of government. However, on the other hand, economic relations with Islamic countries, especially in the trade and energy sectors, remain a top priority. This dilemma is reflected in various dynamics of bilateral relations, such as tensions with Turkey and Saudi Arabia due to differences in political views, but the establishment of close economic cooperation. In addition, domestic dynamics, including immigration issues and the integration of the Muslim community in the Netherlands, also play a role in shaping the country’s foreign policy. As part of the European Union, the Netherlands must balance its stance between the broader European foreign policy and its own national interests. In the future, the Netherlands needs to adopt a more flexible approach to establishing relations with Islamic countries, prioritizing economic diplomacy that remains based on democratic values but with a more pragmatic strategy to avoid unnecessary conflicts. With this balance, the Netherlands can maintain its position as a strong democratic country while maintaining the stability of economic relations with the Islamic world.

Source link