Connect with us

News

Coface Risk Review 2025: The Great Leap Backwards

VORNews

Published

on

Coface Risk Review

TAIWAN– With global tensions and uncertain trade policies, the world economy faces challenges between a likely slowdown and the risk of further shocks Colface reports. Decisions on tariffs by the Trump administration and ongoing conflict in the Middle East are shaping what could be an unpredictable economic climate for 2025 and 2026.

In response to these conditions and current measures, Coface Risk Review has lowered its outlook for 23 industry sectors and 4 countries.

Main trends:

  • US tariffs remain at high levels, even as some have been paused or reduced
  • Nearly 80% of developed countries reported more business defaults in the first quarter of 2025 than in 2024
  • The metal industry has been hit hardest, with automotive and chemicals also under strain
  • Other downgraded sectors include information technology and retail in the US, and textiles and clothing in China, which are feeling the impact of tariffs.

Global economy: living with uncertainty

The outlook for the global economy is now more uncertain, shaped by political events and trade moves led by the US President. The return of tariffs after a 90-day break—on July 9 for most countries and August 12 for China—could impact global growth. Predictions suggest a slowdown in growth at 2.2% in 2025 and 2.3% in 2026, but if tensions rise, growth could drop below 2%.

Inflation is also under pressure. Stability may not last, and it could hit 4% in the US by late 2025, especially if energy prices climb. Central banks are expected to keep a cautious approach. If US inflation is controlled, the Federal Reserve may lower rates in autumn 2025. The European Central Bank plans to continue cutting rates, but says it is nearing the lowest point it will go.

In Europe, uncertainty is rising as countries may finally start tightening their budgets. Germany has launched a stimulus plan, but its full impact is still unclear.

Middle East conflict and oil supply: a tricky balance

The ongoing Israel-Iran conflict has brought fresh worries about oil supply. Any disruption or blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, which handles 20 million barrels a day (about 20% of the world’s supply), could push oil prices above $100 a barrel. Without these tensions, however, rising output from countries outside OPEC+ and weaker demand from trade tensions could see prices fall. OPEC+ is also putting 2.2 million barrels a day back into the market. Unless there is a major crisis, prices are likely to remain very changeable but stay between $65 and $75 a barrel.

Developed economies: both strong and exposed

In the US, uncertainty around how the economy will cope with tariffs is affecting confidence. Consumer outlook is down, but jobs have held steady. The small drop in GDP in the first quarter reflects companies building up stock as a precaution.

Across Europe, Germany saw some growth in early 2025, while France’s economy remains quiet. Italy may lose momentum, but Spain continues to benefit from tourism and EU funds.

Emerging economies face bigger risks from trade changes

China enjoyed a jump in exports during the recent pause on tariffs, but its prospects remain fragile. India’s growth stayed above 7% in the first quarter, yet spending has started to cool and the government has less room to spend.

Mexico is feeling the strain from global trade uncertainty, with no growth expected in 2025. Brazil, after a strong year in farming following losses from El Niño, now faces contraction due to high interest rates (the key rate is up to 15%). In Argentina, the economic policy known as Mileinomics is driving growth. Even with low foreign currency reserves, Argentina could achieve 5% growth in 2025 and 3.5% in 2026.

Metals industry: global steel overcapacity

The metals sector is under pressure, facing a surplus of 600 million tonnes of steel in 2024, a quarter of total world production. Weak demand, energy costs, and new steel tariffs are making life tougher for producers, particularly in Canada, Mexico, and Europe.

Canada: tariffs weigh on growth

With three-quarters of its exports going to the US, Canada is one of the hardest-hit countries by the trade disputes. Growth momentum faded after a burst in late 2024. Consumer spending and investment are both down, and unemployment stands at 6.9%, the highest since 2017.

According to Coface, exports fell sharply in April as firms rushed to avoid tariff hikes. The car and metal industries, hit with tariff increases up to 50%, have been especially affected. The upcoming review of the USMCA agreement, expected by the end of 2025, could add to Canada’s economic worries.

Read the full study here.

COFACE: For Trade

Coface has supported companies worldwide for nearly 80 years, helping them grow and manage risks in uncertain times.

Coface serves 100,000 clients in around 200 countries and offers a range of services including Trade Credit Insurance, Business Information, Debt Collection, Single Risk Insurance, Surety Bonds, and Factoring.

Each day, Coface uses its experience and advanced tools to support trade, both at home and overseas. In 2024, Coface had over 5,200 employees and a turnover of about €1.845 billion.

Related News:

Inflation Driven by Tariffs Begins to Appear, as Economists Feared

Continue Reading

News

U.S. Forces Hit and Destroy 16 Iranian Mine-Laying Boats Near the Strait of Hormuz

VORNews

Published

on

By

U.S. Forces Hit and Destroy 16 Iranian Mine-Laying Boats

Washington, D.C.- U.S. forces destroyed 16 Iranian mine-laying vessels near the Strait of Hormuz near Iran, according to U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). The strikes took place on March 10 and focused on boats officials said posed a near-term risk to commercial and military traffic in the area.

CENTCOM shared the announcement on X (formerly Twitter) and posted a video of the operation. The footage shows repeated precision hits on Iranian naval craft, with clear impacts and blasts. Several targets look stationary in the clips. The message from the U.S. is clear: it intends to keep shipping moving through the Strait of Hormuz, where about one-fifth of the world’s crude oil travels each day.

The operation followed strong public warnings from President Donald Trump, who said Iran must not mine the waterway. On Truth Social, Trump wrote that the U.S. had already “hit, and completely destroyed, 10 inactive mine laying boats and/or ships, with more to follow.” He also said any mines placed in the strait must be removed right away. Otherwise, he warned of “military consequences at a level never seen before.”

Those statements came as reports circulated that Iranian forces had begun placing naval mines. Soon after, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth backed up the White House position on X. He said CENTCOM was “eliminating inactive mine-laying vessels” with “ruthless precision” under the president’s direct orders. He added that the U.S. won’t allow “terrorists to hold the Strait of Hormuz hostage.”

Key takeaways from the strike

  • Timing and scale: The strikes happenedon  March 10, 2026, and hit multiple Iranian vessels, including 16 mine-layers.
  • CENTCOM confirmation: CENTCOM posted about the action on X and included video of the strikes near the Strait of Hormuz.
  • Trump’s role: Trump first reported 10 destroyed vessels, then later statements and reporting reflected a total of 16.
  • Why it matters: The action targets a mine threat that could endanger or slow commercial shipping in a major energy route.
  • Wider conflict: The strikes fit into broader U.S.-Iran fighting, with reports of thousands of U.S. strikes on Iranian targets since late February 2026.
  • Iran’s position: Tehran has threatened to block Gulf oil exports in response, raising concerns about a wider regional crisis.

The Strait of Hormuz sits between Iran and Oman and remains one of the most tense hotspots in the Middle East. If traffic there gets blocked or tightly restricted, oil prices could spike fast, and the shock could spread through the global economy.

What the video shows and why the targets mattered

In the footage CENTCOM released, U.S. munitions hit several Iranian vessels one after another. Fires and secondary blasts follow some impacts, which suggests heavy damage. Officials described the targets as mine layers that could place naval mines in shipping lanes. Although some were labeled “inactive,” U.S. leaders treated them as a ready threat because they could move quickly once ordered.

U.S. forces have hit Iranian maritime assets in the region before. One often-cited example is the 1988 Operation Praying Mantis, when the U.S. Navy attacked Iranian platforms and vessels after a mine damaged a U.S. frigate.

By knocking out the mine-laying boats, the U.S. says it’s protecting freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. Officials have also signaled they may escort commercial tankers if threats continue. Meanwhile, energy markets have moved sharply as traders watch for the next step on both sides.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have promised countermoves, including threats to choke off Gulf oil routes. If disruptions drag on, analysts warn crude prices could climb quickly, and supply chains could face a new strain.

Related News:

Trump Praises Albanese Over Giving Iranian Women Footballers Asylum

Canada’s Carney Betrays the US, Condemns Defensive Strikes on Iran

Continue Reading

News

CBS Caught Making Deceptive EDIT to 60 Minutes Interview With Hegseth

VORNews

Published

on

By

CBS Caught Making Deceptive EDIT

WASHINGTON, D.C.– CBS is taking heat over an edit in its 60 Minutes interview with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The dispute centers on a segment that aired March 8, 2026, during the ongoing U.S. conflict with Iran. In the broadcast, correspondent Major Garrett pressed Hegseth on U.S. foreign policy priorities.

On March 9, Megyn Kelly opened The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM by pointing to what she called a key change. She said CBS replaced Garrett’s original question, which referenced criticism from “America First” voices (including Kelly), with a version framed around Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In Kelly’s view, that swap changed the meaning of Hegseth’s answer and could have given viewers a different impression of what was being discussed.

The Interview Setting: The U.S.-Iran War and Hegseth’s Message

The 60 Minutes segment featured Hegseth, a former Fox News host who now serves as Defense Secretary under President Donald Trump. He spoke about the escalation tied to “Operation Epic Fury.” By the time the episode aired, U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian assets had entered their second week. During the interview, Hegseth stressed resolve, said more casualties were likely, and predicted Iran would eventually surrender.

CBS also posted a longer version of the interview online. That extended cut includes more on possible American losses, risks tied to Russia, and the administration’s wider goals.

What Kelly Says CBS Changed

Kelly said she compared the on-air segment with the longer online interview and found a major difference in one exchange.

  • Broadcast version (aired on 60 Minutes): In the edited segment, Garrett’s question (or narration around it) referenced criticism that Israel, or Netanyahu, was pulling the United States into conflict. Hegseth’s response then appeared to address concerns linked to Israel’s role.
  • Online extended version (full exchange): Garrett asked, “You mentioned America First. Some who identify with that movement, Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Marjorie Taylor Greene, have said, from their perspective, this isn’t an America First campaign. Do you want to address that criticism?”Hegseth answered, “All I know is I’m in the room every day, and I see how President Trump operates and what he’s putting first, and it’s America, Americans, and American interests at every level.”

Kelly said the broadcast edit pushed Israel into a moment that, in the longer cut, had nothing to do with Israel. She argued that the new framing made it sound like Hegseth was defending Israel’s part in the war, instead of answering “America First” critics. Kelly called the change “deceptive” and said it looked like an attempt to “rehabilitate” public views of Israel’s involvement in the Iran fight.

“What kind of bulls–t is this?” Kelly reportedly said, accusing CBS of shaping the narrative through editing.

CBS Editing Choices Get Fresh Scrutiny

As of March 10, 2026, CBS had not released a formal statement addressing the claim. Still, the network’s decision to publish the extended interview online made it easy for viewers to compare both versions. That side-by-side access helped drive the backlash.

Kelly and other critics tied the issue to bigger arguments about media bias. Some also pointed to CBS News leadership under editor-in-chief Bari Weiss, whom they described as having pro-Israel views. Kelly argued the edit fit an agenda that casts U.S. actions as tied closely to Israeli interests, even when the original exchange did not focus on that angle.

60 Minutes has faced similar complaints before. Past disputes have accused the program of selective editing in political interviews, which has kept questions about transparency alive.

Reactions and the Bigger Stakes

The clip dispute quickly spread across media outlets and social platforms.

  • Conservative voices praised Kelly and said the edit showed how mainstream outlets treat “America First” views.
  • Others defended CBS, saying edits are normal when a long interview must fit a tight broadcast window.
  • Some supporters of the administration said it looked like another attempt to weaken Trump’s foreign policy message.

Because the U.S. military campaign is active, the timing matters. Hegseth’s appearance was meant to project strength and certainty. Instead, the argument over editing shifted attention to media trust and how much framing can change what viewers take away.

Kelly ended by urging people to watch both versions. She stressed that, in her view, “The Q&A you saw never mentioned Israel at all,” and said CBS changed the question to make it about Israel.

What It Means for Media Trust

With audiences already split along political lines, even small shifts in wording can fuel bigger mistrust. When a network changes the framing of a question, it can look like agenda-driven editing, even if the rest of the answer stays the same. CBS’s release of the full interview gives the public a way to verify what happened. At the same time, it shows how a broadcast cut can reshape the story people think they heard.

As the Iran conflict continues, both the war itself and the coverage around it will draw more scrutiny. For now, the Hegseth interview has become another flashpoint in the fight over fairness, accuracy, and where editing ends and manipulation begins.

Related News:

Karoline Leavitt Slams CBS News Over ICE Deportation Numbers

AOC Accuses Jessie Watters of Fox News of Sexualizing and Harassing Her

Continue Reading

News

Trump Praises Albanese Over Giving Iranian Women Footballers Asylum

VORNews

Published

on

By

Trump praises Albanese in call over Iranian women footballers

WASHINGTON, D.C.Donald Trump praised Anthony Albanese for his response to the situation, saying he is doing a “very good job,” for granting the Iranian Women’s Soccer Players asylum in Australia after their Gold Coast Escape.

During the AFC Women’s Asian Cup 2026, five players from Iran’s national women’s soccer team have received humanitarian visas that let them stay in Australia. They approached the Australian Federal Police (AFP) after breaking away from team minders and asking for protection.

The athletes named in reports are Captain Zahra Ghanbari, Fatemeh Pasandideh, Zahra Sarbali, Atefeh Ramazanzadeh, and Mona Hamoudi. They left their Gold Coast hotel on Monday night, March 9, 2026.

Soon after, officers moved them to a secure location. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke met with them late that night, then approved the visas around 1:30 a.m. Tuesday.

They say they feared persecution if they returned to Iran. Concerns grew after Iran’s opening match against South Korea, when the team stood silent during the national anthem. Many saw that silence as a protest during a tense period, including the ongoing US-Israel conflict involving Iran.

After that match, Iranian state television called the players “wartime traitors” and accused them of reaching “the pinnacle of dishonour.” At the same time, conservative voices pushed for harsh punishment.

Because of those comments, human rights advocates and members of the Iranian diaspora warned that the players could face prison, torture, or worse if forced to go home.

In later matches against Australia and the Philippines, the squad sang and saluted during the anthem. Even so, some observers believed officials traveling with the team pressured them to comply.

Trump praises Albanese in call over Iranian women footballers

Escape From the Hotel and AFP Support

Reports say the five women slipped away from minders at the Royal Pines Resort. Australian authorities had kept a police presence at the hotel for days. As a result, players had a way to seek help quietly if they chose to.

  • AFP response: Officers escorted the women out and took them to a safe location.
  • Humanitarian visas: Officials issued the visas quickly after security checks, allowing the players to live, work, and study in Australia.
  • Tony Burke’s comments: “They are safe here, they are welcome to stay in Australia, and they should feel at home here,” Burke said at a press conference. He also said the offer remains open to other team members who ask for help.

Meanwhile, protests formed outside the team hotel as the remaining squad prepared to leave for Iran. Demonstrators shouted “save our girls” and briefly blocked a bus. Some videos appeared to show players signaling distress from inside the vehicles.

rump praises Albanese in call over Iranian women footballers

International Spotlight After Trump and Albanese Speak

The situation quickly became a diplomatic issue. US President Donald Trump called Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in the early morning hours, around 2 a.m. local time. Trump urged Australia to grant asylum and said sending the players back would be a “terrible humanitarian mistake.”

Before the call, Trump posted on social media criticizing any forced return. He also suggested the US would consider asylum if Australia refused. After speaking with Albanese, Trump praised his handling of what he called a “delicate situation.” He also said five players had been “taken care of.”

Albanese called the athletes “brave.” He added that Australia stands ready to assist other players if they come forward.

Wider Context and Ongoing Safety Concerns

Iran’s participation in the tournament happened during a period of regional unrest. That backdrop added to fears about what could happen to the players once they returned home. Groups such as FIFPRO, the global players’ union, raised alarms. Exiled Iranian figures, including Reza Pahlavi, also drew attention to the defections.

Australia’s quick decision stood out because the country is known for tough border rules. Still, officials pointed to Australia’s humanitarian responsibilities under international law. They also repeated that protection remains available to any other squad members who request it.

As of March 10, 2026, reports said the remaining players were still at the Gold Coast hotel, with some expected to fly back to Iran. The five who sought asylum reportedly celebrated after receiving approval, chanting “Aussie, Aussie, Aussie!”

The episode shows how sport, politics, and human rights can collide fast. What started as a silent gesture on the field turned into a global asylum story within days.

Related News:

Trump Pushes Back on War Hawks, Choosing Deals Over a Long Iran Overthrow Plan

Trump Takes Aim at China’s Critical Minerals Control With Project Vault

Continue Reading

Get 30 Days Free

Express VPN

Create Super Content

rightblogger

Flight Buddies Needed

Flight Volunteers Wanted

Trending