top of page

Follow on Social Media

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Screenshot 2022-09-18 at 5.20.40 PM

M'sia Developments
[on SubStack]

  • Screenshot 2022-09-18 at 5.20.40 PM

MANILA, Philippines, Nov 11 2025 (IPS) - US President Trump’s economic strategy for his second term aims to get the rest of the world, especially its wealthy allies with greater means, to pay more to help strengthen the US economy.


Recent US initiatives have undoubtedly accelerated de-dollarisation but these have largely been unavoidable consequences of its own actions rather than due to any conspiracy by others to that end.

De-dollarisation distraction

Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff recently observed, “We are absolutely at the biggest inflection point in the global currency system since the Nixon shock to end the last vestige of the gold standard.”

After the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, the gold price was set at $35 per ounce. In August 1971, US President Richard Nixon ended this gold-dollar parity.

De-dollarisation has gradually continued since, with occasional brief spurts and reversals. For example, capital flows abroad rose following the 2008-09 global financial crisis.

Growing weaponisation of economic relations has probably accelerated de-dollarisation. Rogoff observed, “this was happening for a decade before Trump. Trump is an accelerant.”

Governments, central banks and BRICS countries have been de-dollarising. Even US dollar hegemony advocates no longer deny alternatives to the dollar’s role as global reserve currency.

Meanwhile, private foreign investors, including foreign asset managers, investment banks and pension funds, do not want to be left behind.

Investment fund managers are increasingly ‘de-risking’ by cutting exposure to dollar-denominated assets.

Mar-a-Lago plan

Economist Stephen Miran has proposed a new Trump initiative to require other governments to pay the US for services purportedly rendered.

First appointed chair of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers, Miran has since been appointed to the US Federal Reserve Board.

A few days after Trump announced his Liberation Day tariffs on April 2, Miran articulated five expectations. These expect other nations to pay the US for ‘public goods’ services it ostensibly provides the world.

Allies will be expected to pay the US more for the ‘security umbrella’ it provides to NATO and other allies. The US also expects those buying Treasury bonds to pay more for the ‘privilege’

In November 2024, Miran’s A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System proposed the Mar-A-Lago accord, named for Trump’s exclusive Florida island resort and residence.

He also referred to the Plaza Accord, which the Reagan administration imposed on its G5 allies in September 1985. Then, the US forced Japan and Germany to appreciate their currencies against the dollar.

The yen’s appreciation fuelled a massive Japanese asset price bubble that burst with devastating consequences in 1989, ending its post-war boom.

Trump now seeks the appreciation of other major currencies. Already, he has succeeded in getting his European allies to agree.

However, it seems unlikely that Trump will get China and other BRICS economies to do so, as they are aware of how the Plaza Accord affected Japan.

Century bonds

Other national monetary authorities buying US Treasury bonds to stabilise their own currencies have long caused dollar appreciation.

They are now expected to help depreciate the dollar. Miran has proposed that the US issue century, i.e., 100-year bonds, at very low interest rates, well below the current rates for US Treasury securities.

Miran wants foreign central bank reserve currency managers to sell off their dollar-denominated assets. They should “term out” their “remaining reserve holdings” and refinance short-term debt with long-term borrowings.

Miran is explicit: “The US Treasury can effectively buy duration back from the market and replace that borrowing with century bonds sold to the foreign official sector.”

His plan thus intends to force foreign holders of US government debt (‘Treasuries’) to extend the duration of their loans.

Very low interest rates for century bonds will ensure that foreign bondholders effectively pay the US more for the ‘privilege’ of borrowing dollars.

For Miran, the appreciation of other currencies against the dollar will also strengthen the American economy. US manufacturing will strengthen as its exports become more competitive.

Thus, his Mar-A-Lago accord plan expects other nations to pay more to strengthen the world’s largest and richest economy.

Miran’s Mar-A-Lago plan is not yet official US policy. However, this can change with Miran’s likely appointment as the next Fed chair, replacing Trump 1.0 appointee Jerome Powell.

BRICS de-dollarisation?

However, Miran’s declared plan to strengthen the US economy by depreciating the dollar against other major currencies has also accelerated de-dollarisation.

In recent years, the BRICS have been accused of conspiring to accelerate de-dollarisation worldwide, but this is certainly not a shared ambition.

Lacking significant trade surpluses, Brazil and South Africa have long advocated de-dollarisation. But Russia’s complaints have more to do with recent NATO weaponisation of financial instruments against it.

There is no comparable enthusiasm among other BRICS member states, which have much healthier trade surpluses and more dollar assets.

Its recent membership expansion will make an official BRICS de-dollarisation stance even more unlikely.

Nevertheless, Trump’s leadership relies on the American public believing the rest of the world is conspiring against them.


 
 
  • Oct 28, 2025
  • 4 min read

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Oct 28 2025 (IPS) - Opposition to data centres (DCs) has been rapidly spreading internationally due to their fast-growing resource demands. DCs have been proliferating quickly, driven by the popularity of artificial intelligence (AI).


Who are data centres for?

Already, the AI boom has overwhelmed other ‘cloud’ uses and drives the rapid growth of DCs, imposing fast-expanding resource demands. This has triggered a bipartisan public backlash in the US due to higher energy, water, and land use, as well as rising prices.


In October 2024, McKinsey projected that global energy demand by DCs would rise between 19% and 22% annually through 2030, reaching an annual demand between 171 and 219 gigawatts.

This greatly exceeds the “current demand of 60 GW”. “To avoid a [supply] deficit, at least twice the [DC] capacity built since 2000 would have to be built in less than a quarter of the time”!

As tech companies are not paying for the additional energy generation capacity, consumers and host governments are, whether they benefit from AI or not.

As DCs increasingly faced growing pushback in the North, developers have turned to developing countries, outsourcing problems to poorer nations with limited resources.

Understanding these energy- and water-guzzling facilities is necessary to better protect economies, societies, communities, and their environments.


Energy needs

With growing corporate and consumer demand for AI, DC growth will continue, and even occasionally accelerate.


Increased AI usage will significantly increase energy and water consumption, accelerating planetary heating both directly and indirectly.


As demand for AI and DCs increases, supporting computers will require significantly more electricity. This will generate heat, needing the use of water and energy for cooling. Much energy used by DCs, from 38% to 50%, is for cooling.

Electricity generation, whether from fossil fuels or nuclear fission, requires more cooling than renewable energy sources such as photovoltaic solar panels or wind turbines.

A small-scale DC with 500 to 2,000 servers consumes one to five megawatts (MW). For tech giants, a ‘hyperscale’ DC, hosting tens of thousands of servers, consumes 20 to over 100MW, like a small city.


Data centres not cool

As the popular focus is on DCs’ enormous energy requirements, their massive water needs to cool equipment tend to be ignored, understated and overlooked.


Locating new DCs in developing countries will further heat local microclimates and the planetary atmosphere. Worse still, heat is more environmentally threatening in the tropics, where ambient temperatures are higher.


Establishing more DCs will inevitably crowd out existing and other possible uses of freshwater supplies, besides reducing local groundwater aquifers.


Unsurprisingly, DC investors rarely warn host governments about the amount of locally supplied energy and water required.


DCs require much freshwater to cool servers and routers. In 2023, Google alone used almost 23 billion litres to cool DCs. In cooling systems using evaporation, cold water is used to absorb severe heat, releasing steam into the atmosphere.


Closed-loop cooling systems absorb heat using piped-in water, while air-cooled chillers cool down hot water. Cooled water recirculated for cooling requires less water but more energy to chill hot water.


Investors expect subsidies

Like other prospective investors, DCs have relocated to areas where host governments have been more generous and less demanding.


Led by US President Trump’s powerful ‘tech bros’, many foreign investors have profited from subsidised energy, cheap land and water, and other special incentives.


Prospective host governments compete to offer tax and other incentives, such as subsidised energy and water, to attract foreign direct investment in DCs.


The US pressured Malaysia and Thailand to stop Chinese firms from using them as an “export-control backdoor” for its AI chips. Washington alleges that DCs outside China buy chips to train its AI for military purposes. So far, only Malaysia has complied.


This limits Chinese firms’ access to such chips. Washington claims that Chinese substitutes for US-made chips are inferior and seeks to protect US technology from China.


High-tech DC jobs?

Data centres are emerging everywhere, but not many jobs will be created. Advocates claim DCs will provide high-tech jobs.


DCs are largely self-operating, requiring minimal human intervention, except for maintenance, which they determine independently. Thus, job creation is minimised.


Construction and installation work will be temporary, with most managerial functions being performed remotely from headquarters. A Georgetown University report estimates only 27% of DC jobs are ‘technical’.


While the DC discourse mainly focuses on foreign investments, there is little discussion on growing national desires for data sovereignty.


Acceding to so many foreign requests will inevitably block national capacity ambitions to develop end-to-end DC capabilities and not just host them.


Thus far, there is limited interest in the ‘afterlife’ of DCs, such as what happens after they have outlived their purpose, or the disposal of waste materials.


Higher energy and water costs, subsidies, tax incentives and other problems caused by DCs are hardly offset by their modest employment and other benefits.


Related IPS Articles


 
 

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Oct 14 2025 (IPS) - Global South cooperation arrangements must evolve to better respond to pressing contemporary and imminent challenges, rather than risk being irrelevant straitjackets stuck in the past.


Southeast Asia

In 1967, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was established, initially to address regional tensions following the formation of Malaysia in September 1963.


The creation of Malaysia had led to problems with the Philippines and Indonesia, while Singapore had seceded from the new confederation in August 1965.

ASEAN was not a Cold War creation in the same sense as the Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO), one of several regional security arrangements established by the Americans in the early 1950s, the only significant one remaining being NATO.

ASEAN’s most significant initiative was to declare Southeast Asia a Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality (ZOPFAN) in 1973, two years before the end of the Indochina wars.

Regional economic cooperation

The region has since seen four major economic initiatives, with the first being the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA).

AFTA was established at the height of the trade liberalisation zeal in the early 1990s. Beyond the initial ‘one-time’ trade liberalisation effects, there has been little actual economic transformation since then.


Trade liberalisation mahaguru Jagdish Bhagwati’s last (2008) book, Termites in the Trading System, saw preferential plurilateral and bilateral FTAs as ‘termites’ undermining the WTO promise of multilateral trade liberalisation.


While seemingly mutually beneficial, such FTAs are akin to termites that surreptitiously erode the foundations of the multilateral trading system by encouraging discrimination, thereby undermining the principle of non-discrimination.


Naive enthusiasm for all FTAs has thus actually undermined multilateralism, also triggering pushback since the late 20th century.


Following the 2008-09 global financial crisis, the G20’s developed economies all raised protectionist barriers, confirming their dubious commitment to free trade.


Meanwhile, US trade policies since the Obama presidency, and especially this year, have made a mockery of the WTO’s commitment to the multilateralism of the 1994 Marrakech Declaration.


Asymmetric financialization

The 1997-98 Asian financial crisis should have served as a wake-up call about the dangers of financialization, but the West dismissed it as simply due to Asian hubris.


Under Managing Director Michel Camdessus, IMF promotion of capital account liberalisation even contravened the Fund’s own Articles of Agreement.


When Japanese Finance Minister Miyazawa and Vice Minister Sakakibara proposed an East Asian financial rescue plan, which was soon killed by then US Treasury Deputy Secretary Larry Summers.


Eventually, the Chiang Mai Initiative was developed by ASEAN+3, including Japan, South Korea, and China as the additional three. Ensuring bilateral swap facilities for financial emergencies have since been multi-lateralised.


ASEAN+3 later led the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), still conceived mainly in terms of regional trade liberalisation.


Non-alignment for our times

Developing relevant institutions and arrangements in our times requires us to pragmatically consider history, rather than abstract, ahistorical principles.


2025 marks several significant anniversaries, most notably the end of World War II in 1945 and the 1955 Bandung Asia-Africa solidarity conference, which anticipated the formation of the non-aligned movement.


The world seems to have lost its commitment to creating the conditions for enduring peace. Despite much rhetoric, the post-World War II commitment to freedom and neutrality in the Global North has largely gone.


The world was deemed unipolar after the end of the Cold War. However, for most, it has been multipolar, with the majority of the Global South remaining non-aligned.


As for peace-making, the US’s NATO allies have increasingly marginalised the United Nations and multilateralism with it. Already, the number of military interventions since the end of the Cold War exceeds those of that era.


While ASEAN cannot realistically lead international peace-making, it can be a much stronger voice for multilateralism, peace, freedom, neutrality, development, and international cooperation.


East Asian potential

The world economy is now stagnating due to Western policies. Hence, ASEAN+3 has become more relevant.


Just before President Trump made his April 2nd Liberation Day unilateral tariffs announcement, the governments of Japan, China, and South Korea met in late March without ASEAN to coordinate responses despite their long history of tensions.


ASEAN risks becoming increasingly irrelevant, due to the limited progress since the Chiang Mai Agreement a quarter of a century ago. Worse, ASEAN’s regional leadership has rarely gone beyond trade liberalisation, now sadly irrelevant in ‘post-normal’ times.


Rather than risk growing irrelevance, regional cooperation needs to rise to contemporary challenges. Working closely with partners accounting for two-fifths of the world economy, ASEAN countries only stand to gain from broader regional cooperation.


President Trump’s ‘shock and awe’ tariffs and Mar-a-Lago ambitions clearly signal that ‘business as usual’ is over, and Washington intends to remake the world. Will East Asia rise to this challenge of our times?



Related IPS Articles


 
 

Latest Videos

All Videos

All Videos

AN URGENT CALL: A PEOPLE"S VACCINE AGAINST COVID-19

00:00
9 June 2020: IHD-ILO-ISLE Virtual Conference - Day 2

9 June 2020: IHD-ILO-ISLE Virtual Conference - Day 2

05:08:34
Learning in Governance in times of COVID-19

Learning in Governance in times of COVID-19

46:30
Beyond the Lockdown: Towards the ‘New Normal’

Beyond the Lockdown: Towards the ‘New Normal’

59:10

About Jomo

Jomo Kwame Sundaram is Research Adviser, Khazanah Research Institute, Fellow, Academy of Science, Malaysia, and Emeritus Professor, University of Malaya. Previously, he was UN Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development, Assistant Director General, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Founder-Chair, International Development Economics Associates (IDEAs) and President, Malaysian Social Science Association. 

In The Media

TheStar 26 June 2020

TheStar 26 June 2020

The Star 20 Sept 2019

The Star 20 Sept 2019

Political will needed to push for renewable energy

The Star 10July 2019

The Star 10July 2019

Malaysian businesses need boost

The Star 9 Oct 2019

The Star 9 Oct 2019

Subsidise public transport for bottom 40%

The Edge 26 Sept 2019

The Edge 26 Sept 2019

Call for measures to counteract global headwinds

The Edge 9 Oct 2019

The Edge 9 Oct 2019

Subsidise public transportation, not fuel

The Star 8 Oct 2019

The Star 8 Oct 2019

Subsidise public transportation for bottom 70%

TheEdge 2Oct 2019

TheEdge 2Oct 2019

"We need to counteract downward forces"

Fake News

PLEASE BEWARE OF MISREPRESENTATIONS OF IMAGES OF JOMO

Commercial and political misrepresentation of his image attributing to him to things which he never said or misrepresenting things he may have said is being circulated on websites such as those posted here. 


You should also be warned, in case you are not already aware, of ‘click bait’ i.e. using such images simply to attract your interest, and then to download your online information for abuse for a variety of ends.

Please inform us and provide a screenshot and weblink to enable further action, which is incredibly difficult. 

Thank you for reading this and for your help and cooperation.

This has also been flagged on his official Facebook page

 

JKS image ad2.jpg
JKS image Bitcoin ad on  Facebook.jpg
JKS - Fake News 2.jpg
Contact Me
JKS - Fake News 3.jpg
JKS fake news 1.jpg

Contact Me

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon

Thank you for reaching out!

bottom of page