Gold prices are back above the $2,700 per ounce mark on Friday as increased safe-haven demand boosted sentiments. 

Prices have climbed to a near one-month high on Friday because of uncertainty over US interest rates and trade tariffs by the US President-elect Donald Trump. 

Gold bulls have been largely ignoring the strength in the dollar index.

A stronger dollar makes commodities priced in the greenback more expensive for overseas buyers, thereby limiting demand. 

At the time of writing, the February gold contract on COMEX was at $2,703.59 per ounce, up 0.5% from the previous close. 

Silver futures on COMEX were also higher at $31.122 per ounce, up 0.4% from Thursday’s close. 

Both gold and silver have been rising this week due to increased safe-haven inflows, according to experts. 

Trade jitters spur demand

Gold spot prices were trading nearly 2% higher from the close of last week. 

Markets were on the edge ahead of the release of the US non-farm employment change report due later on Friday. 

The data would give more cues to the market about the Federal Reserve’s interest rate cutting path in the coming months. 

The uncertainty over trade tariffs by Trump has also spurred some safe-haven demand in the dollar. 

Both gold and the dollar “show strength at the same time when both are being sought as safe haven investments in the face of an uncertain global political situation,” Barbara Lambrecht, commodity analyst at Commerzbank, said.

This currently appears to be the case, even if some of the global uncertainty stems from the US and the President-elect himself.

“The inauguration of Donald Trump on 20 January is unlikely to change this, at least in the short term, which is why gold should remain supported,” she added. 

Focus on Fed

The minutes from the US Fed’s last meeting showed that the policymakers were cautious about cutting interest rates further. 

The cautiousness was due to a resilient economy and sticky inflation in the US.

The labour market also remained relatively stable in the US. 

More economic data from the US later on Friday could lend cues to the gold price. 

Fed officials were also seen expressing some concerns over inflationary pressures from protectionist and expansionary policies under Trump.

Uncertainty over his plans is expected to build ahead of his inauguration on January 20. 

Trump’s plans are expected to feed into higher inflation, which would then prompt the Fed to slow down its monetary easing. 

Elevated interest rates reduce the appeal of non-yielding metals such as gold and silver. 

Global gold ETFs

According to data from the World Gold Council (WGC), gold ETFs recorded outflows of 6.8 tons last year. 

The outflows are therefore significantly smaller than the 85 tons reported by Bloomberg, as the WGC takes a larger number of ETFs into account, according to Commerzbank.  

As the gold price rose sharply at the same time, the asset value of ETF holdings (AUM) increased by $56 billion compared to the previous year despite the outflows. 

ETFs listed in Europe experienced outflows of 98 tons last year.

However, inflows were recorded in North America and Asia. 

Inflows of 8 tons were recorded in North America and about 78.4 tons in Asia, according WGC data. 

The post Gold prices soar to one-month highs: what’s supporting the rally? appeared first on Invezz

January 10 is a crucial day in Venezuela because it initiates a new presidential term.

Nevertheless, the problem is the controversial fact that the elections on July 28 have brought to the fore, in which President Nicolás Maduro declared himself the winner without any proof.

On the contrary, the opposition candidate Edmundo González announced himself as the winner, proving this with the assistance of electoral records from polling station witnesses and thereby obtaining the support and recognition of the international community, such as the European Union, Argentina, Chile and most of LATAM.

We will examine different scenarios for Venezuela in 2025 depending on how the political landscape develops.

What are the economic scenarios for Venezuela in 2025?

Venezuelan economist Aldo Contreras provided a profound look into Venezuela’s economic prospects, evaluating two possible scenarios by 2025.

He said to Invezz that if Nicolás Maduro remains in power, the country will see “very exiguous growth,” with an economic increase of roughly 4% to 5%.

While this nominal increase could raise the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) from around $106 billion to $110 billion, it is critical to grasp the astonishing truth that Venezuela’s economy has collapsed by approximately 75% from its previous top of $500 billion.

Contreras emphasizes the underlying contradiction: “In terms of percentages, this growth is what many countries experience, but nominally, the decline is devastating.”

In this difficult environment, Contreras expects inflation to reach 60% during Maduro’s presidency, worsening Venezuela’s economic picture.

He cautions that “with the arrival of Donald Trump to the presidency on January 20, the likelihood of intensified economic sanctions could significantly impact oil production,” which may fall dramatically, resulting in acute gasoline shortages and reduced fiscal revenues for the state.

This condition threatens to stymie any possible recovery, resulting in lower foreign currency revenues and a declining exchange rate, which might exacerbate the cost of living crisis for many Venezuelans.

Contreras emphasizes the humanitarian significance of these economic issues, stating that around “53% of the population is living in extreme poverty,” which is defined as surviving on less than $1.25 per day”.

Despite a significant rise in tax revenue—from $6 billion in 2023 to $12 billion in 2024—this has not translated into better living conditions or salary increases.

Contreras believes that with many residents earning an alarming average of $3 per month, urgent improvements are required.

He adds that without “solid institutions and a favourable international economic context,” Venezuela’s prospects in 2025 are gloomy, emphasizing the critical need for stability and governance to create genuine economic recovery and social well-being.

Venezuela’s potential losses in oil revenues with Maduro’s remaining in office

Contreras also asserts that the possibility of Nicolás Maduro still being in power will lead to Venezuela losing at least $12 billion a year in oil revenues.

This is especially foreseeable due to the expected retreat of leading oil companies like Chevron, Repsol, and Eni, which have been crucial players in the Venezuelan oil sector.

The prospect of growing penalties could lead to the companies’ exit, which in turn, would worsen the economic situation.

In the case when these companies would be out, Venezuela’s oil production could drop from 1 million barrels per day to the minimum of 500,000 barrels per day.

This remarkable shrink in production would not only interfere with oil extraction but also cause severe problems for the government’s income.

The untenable $12 billion plunge in oil earnings would be a critical blow to the state’s financial situation thus causing even deeper problems in an economy that is already under immense pressure.

Who will be willing to do business with Venezuela if Maduro stays?

Contreras also explained the potential for business with Venezuela if Maduro stays in power and specified that neighbouring states like Colombia are keeping up with President Gustavo Petro who is navigating a narrow path to balance responsive diplomatic relations and avoid/conceal closures of borders.

Similarly, Brazil and Mexico are following the examples of cautiousness, demonstrating a carefully balanced approach to relations with Venezuela.

He believes that countries like Russia, Iran, Turkey, and India could also set up business with Venezuela, alongside China, which is the first link in the chain of the country’s dealings with imports.

However, Contreras accentuates the challenges Venezuela has in its economy mainly the lack of financing from abroad, governmental debts, and the problems in the floating of new bonds.

These issues seriously impede the bent of Venezuela on being an open economy, thus, restricting it from effectively teaming up with possible international partners.

The presence of economic difficulties not only raises questions but also restricts the possibilities of what business partnerships can be realistically pursued in the present situation.

The possible outcomes of opposition leader Edmundo González ascending to power

If Edmundo González were to take the lead of Venezuela, it is speculated that the nation could encounter an extraordinary increment, going up to 50% or more, in its Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Economist Aldo Contreras noted that such growth would be propelled principally by the collaboration of international financial organizations, particularly the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

He underlined, that the rehab of national assets considered lost, around $700 billion, is of paramount importance for the economy’s revival.

The inflow of foreign investments, accompanied by low country risk, could really place the economy on firm footing and lead this way to an environment where substantial GDP growth is possible.

Furthermore, Gonzalez’s administration can be marked with enhanced tackles to handle inflation, which in turn may give rise to a dual-currency economy.

Aldo Contreras thinks the return of a strong banking sector and the improvement in credit facilities would be a landmark for economic stability.

As the economy enhances, the outspread rate of skilled labour hand may fill in the gap by sending workers from other countries to participate in the construction of national infrastructure, including the laying of roads, airports, seaports as well as educational institutions.

Contreras noted that the moderate inflation target will secure the financing required for the economy’s return to health.

The impending isolation of Venezuela

Speaking to Invezz, political analyst Pablo Quintero forecasted a gradual and hitherto unknown acknowledgement of the Maduro government by the international community after the events anticipated on January 10.

He brings this up to draw a parallel to the situation of 2019 and stresses that countries will be navigating their diplomatic relationships with Venezuela more, based on the interests of each nation.

Quintero marks clearly that such a transformation will equate to a big impact visa-vis the trade ties, particularly, concerning Colombia’s commerce with Venezuela.

He mentions the already figured-out consequence of the activation of the border at Cúcuta, a major juncture for cross-border trade, by claiming that the trend of goods will most probably be stopped as well.

In addressing the wider aspect of this international position, Quintero posits that such a wave of nonrecognition can create intensive diplomatic pressures and may even lead to economic isolation of Venezuela thus abridging its potential for outside investment and banking activities.

He speaks of the kind of sanctions imposed, saying, The so-called overcompliance will reveal, the implementation will be as those suffered back in the past times like 2017 and 2019.

Quintero suggests that the government’s inability to show the acts that would prevent isolation can lead to the self-imposed condition of marginalization.

Regarding the domestic environment, Quintero registers a concerning remark about the social aftermath of this international isolation.

He is predicting an acquaintance of international relationships going south in the minds of the people who would wonder whom to believe in the next electoral process, thus, attaining more social nihilism.

The discontent might well be the reason for massive emigration, especially to Brazil and Colombia’s neighbouring countries which are major target countries for fleeing citizens of Venezuela.

He stresses, with figures as much as 2 million to 5 million people the humanitarian crisis would take a severe turn with the long-lasting disturbances that the country is experiencing in politics and economics.

What’s ahead for Venezuelan opposition?

Pablo Quintero, a political analyst has given the view that the Venezuelan opposition’s prospects of securing any support from the international community are very much narrowed.

Since 2017, the setting of the world international scene regarding Venezuela has been a shift-and-repeat process, the Yoyo type specifically, and was majorly affected by the benchmarks projected by Juan Guaidó which in turn abstracted and blurred the focus of this subject on the whole planet.

Back then, the Organization of American States (OAS) the United Nations, and the U.S. government tried to overrule Maduro and back Juan Guaidó, but in fact, the listed organizations did not achieve good results in 2019.

With the historical context having been mentioned, Quintero argues that caution will be more strict from the international community in the future, due to the fact that different pressing conflicts and economic and geopolitical crisis will attract global attention, whereas Venezuela will not be the only question of concern.

At present, the need for a shift in U.S. policy is, therefore, pointed out by Quintero. He particularly mentions that the hyper-tension in the Middle East and the fluctuations of the oil prices have taken the U.S. focus away from Venezuela for now.

The U.S. role in the Venezuelan Affairs will be like the previous global events that were chief global issues, and thus, no Venezuelan opposition side can count on such a guarantee to acquire the progress in independent and political matters of non-conventional nature.

Speaking about the internal dynamics of political change in Venezuela, he was clear, though, that they are mainly determined by endogenous causes.

These encompass the readiness of top-level officials to renovate the vestiges of the past as well as military sponsorship of the proposals—Quintero asserts that these are absent in the nearer future.

Therefore, Quintero thinks that the opposition must come up with a clear and more focused strategy, harden up and deal with the internal issues.

With the constraints of global distractions due to the diversion of attention and the convolutions in the local political scene. The analyst concluded that any possibility of a real change in Venezuela lies in the hands of Venezuelans and the opposition’s ability to secure military support.

The post Venezuela on the edge: why January 10 is crucial for its future appeared first on Invezz

On Friday, President-elect Donald Trump was sentenced to an “unconditional discharge” in his New York criminal hush money case, just ten days before his second inauguration.

The ruling by Manhattan Judge Juan Merchan means Trump faces no jail time, probation, or fines, making him the first criminal convict to assume the presidency.

The case, which has drawn national and international attention, underscores the legal and political complexities surrounding Trump’s return to the White House.

Judge Merchan delivered the sentence during a hearing where Trump appeared remotely.

‘This has been a very terrible experience’

“This has been a very terrible experience,” Trump said, reiterating claims that the case was a politically motivated effort to tarnish his reputation before the election.

He described the proceedings as part of a broader “political witch hunt.”

The case stemmed from allegations that Trump falsified business records in connection with a $130,000 payment made by his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to adult film star Stormy Daniels.

The payment was intended to keep Daniels silent about claims of an alleged affair with Trump, which he has denied.

A jury in May found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts related to these payments.

Judge Merchan explained that an unconditional discharge was the only lawful sentence he could impose without encroaching on the presidency.

“The protection of the office of the presidency is a factor that overrides all others,” Merchan said.

He noted that as an ordinary citizen, Trump would not have received such considerable protections.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass supported the recommendation for unconditional discharge, citing the need to respect the presidency.

However, Steinglass criticized Trump for his persistent attacks on the justice system during the trial, accusing him of damaging public trust in the judiciary.

Throughout the hearing, Trump appeared stoic, occasionally frowning and displaying signs of impatience.

His attorney, Todd Blanche, voiced his disagreement with the prosecution’s arguments, calling it a “sad day for the country.”

Trump celebrates the outcome

Despite the somber tone in court, Trump later celebrated the outcome on his Truth Social platform.

Source: TruthSocial

“The Radical Democrats have lost another pathetic, unAmerican Witch Hunt,” he posted, claiming the penalty-free ruling vindicated him.

The sentencing followed a contentious legal battle, culminating in a US Supreme Court decision just hours earlier.

In a narrow 5-4 ruling, the court denied Trump’s request to block the proceedings, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining Chief Justice John Roberts and three liberal justices in the majority.

The decision cleared the way for the historic sentencing.

This high-profile case has once again thrust Trump into the center of political and legal debates as he prepares to take office for a second term.

While the sentence itself imposes no penalties, its implications for the presidency and public trust in the justice system remain profound.

As Trump navigates this legal storm, the nation watches closely, awaiting the impact of these unprecedented events on his leadership and legacy.

The post Donald Trump sentenced to ‘unconditional discharge’ in hush money case appeared first on Invezz

In 1946, President Harry Truman proposed buying Greenland for $100 million in gold, recognizing its strategic importance in the early Cold War.

The offer was rejected.

Decades later, Donald Trump reignited the idea in 2019, framing it as “a large real estate deal.”

Now, as Trump prepares to re-enter the White House, he has escalated his rhetoric, suggesting military force or economic pressure to bring Greenland under US control. 

While this proposal has drawn criticism worldwide, it reflects the rising importance of the Arctic in global geopolitics.

What makes Greenland so valuable?

Greenland is no ordinary island. It is the largest in the world, spanning over 2.1 million square kilometers.

Its position between North America and Europe places it at the heart of transatlantic relations.

It sits along the shortest route for missile and air travel between the continents, making it indispensable for the US ballistic missile early-warning system. 

Additionally, Arctic shipping routes are becoming increasingly navigable due to climate change.

The Northwest Passage and the Northern Sea Route promise to reduce travel times for global shipping, giving Arctic nations a significant economic edge.

For the US, Greenland is not just a gateway but also a defense buffer. It hosts the Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base), the northernmost US military outpost.

This installation plays a critical role in monitoring Russian and Chinese military activities, ensuring satellite communications, and providing missile defense.

Greenland’s mineral reserves are another draw.

A 2023 survey identified 25 of 34 critical raw materials on the island, including rare earth elements, lithium, and graphite.

These materials are essential for renewable energy technologies, batteries, and military equipment.

Rare earths, for instance, are vital for electric vehicles, wind turbines, and advanced electronics.

While Greenland’s hydrocarbons and minerals remain largely untapped, they represent a significant opportunity. However, resource extraction is contentious.

Environmental concerns and Indigenous opposition have stalled many projects. 

Who owns Greenland?

Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark.

It governs its domestic affairs, including healthcare, education, and natural resources, while Denmark retains control over foreign policy and defense.

Since 2009, Greenland has had the right to declare independence through a referendum.

Calls for independence are growing, driven by historical grievances, including colonial-era policies such as forced birth control campaigns on Greenlandic women. 

Prime Minister Múte Egede has indicated that a referendum could be held within the next decade. 

However, independence for the island wouldn’t be straightforward.

Greenland’s economy is heavily dependent on Danish subsidies, which account for about half of its public budget (€600 million annually). 

Fishing, the island’s primary industry, lacks the scale to replace this support.

If Greenland gains independence, it would need to secure alternative financial and defense arrangements.

The US could play a significant role, offering economic aid in exchange for strategic agreements.

However, many Greenlanders remain wary of becoming a US dependency, valuing their autonomy and Indigenous heritage.

Trump’s renewed interest

Donald Trump’s latest push to acquire Greenland is driven by more than economic considerations. 

His administration has reframed the issue as a matter of national security.

Trump argues that controlling Greenland is essential to counter growing Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic. 

This is evident as both nations have ramped up their activities in the region: Russia with its Arctic military bases and China with its investments and Arctic shipping ambitions.

Trump’s rhetoric has now changed from transactional—treating Greenland as a “real estate deal”—to strategic.

His administration has floated ideas ranging from outright purchase to economic incentives tied to Greenland’s potential independence. 

Trump’s threat to use military force or impose economic sanctions and tariffs on Denmark really shows his determination, but it has also drawn widespread criticism.

Can Trump actually buy Greenland?

Donald Trump’s ambition to bring Greenland under US control hinges on three potential pathways: a direct purchase, a Compact of Free Association (COFA), or an expanded military presence.

While bold in theory, each option comes with significant legal, diplomatic, and political challenges.

A direct purchase of Greenland, like Alaska or the Philippines in earlier US history, would require Greenland’s independence from Denmark, as Denmark likely lacks the legal authority to sell the territory. 

Even if Greenland declared independence, such a sale would depend on the consent of Greenland’s people, who have repeatedly rejected Trump’s proposals. 

A COFA, similar to US agreements with Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, could allow Greenland to maintain formal independence while granting the US exclusive military access and financial support.

This option could align with Greenland’s aspirations for independence but would require some additional steps to avoid perceptions of neo-colonialism. 

Finally, if neither ownership nor a COFA is viable, Trump could push for an expanded military presence, enhancing US operations at the Pituffik Space Base or establishing new Arctic installations.

This approach would bypass sovereignty disputes but risk alienating Greenlanders and Denmark. 

Some critics argue that this approach would be similar to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and could risk escalations of similar magnitude.

European and NATO reactions

Trump’s rhetoric has triggered strong reactions from European leaders. 

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has reiterated that Greenland is not for sale, emphasizing the island’s autonomy. 

Germany and France have condemned Trump’s threats, with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz calling them a violation of international law.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot has warned against threats to European sovereignty, likening them to a return to the “law of the strongest.”

The European Union has also weighed in, confirming that Denmark could invoke the EU’s mutual assistance clause (Article 42.7) in the event of an attack. 

NATO has not officially commented, but Trump’s threats against a NATO ally undermine the alliance’s cohesion, particularly as it faces challenges from Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.

Challenges to Trump’s plans

Modern international law makes the purchase or forced acquisition of territory highly controversial. 

While the US has a history of territorial expansion, such as the purchase of Alaska in 1867, such actions are now largely taboo.

Any unilateral move by the US would face significant diplomatic backlash and could destabilize transatlantic relations.

Greenlanders have expressed strong resistance to the idea of US control.

Many view Trump’s proposals as a threat to their autonomy and cultural identity. 

Without the support of Greenland’s population, any US effort to establish control would be politically and diplomatically untenable.

What’s next for Greenland?

The Arctic is no longer a frozen frontier. Melting ice is transforming it into a hotspot for global competition.

Russia has made significant investments in Arctic military infrastructure, including bases and nuclear-powered icebreakers. 

China, despite being a “near-Arctic state,” has declared its interest in the region, seeking access to resources and shipping routes.

That’s why Greenland’s future is currently uncertain. Its independence movement is gaining momentum, but economic realities pose significant hurdles. 

The US could offer financial support and security guarantees to an independent Greenland, potentially through a Compact of Free Association (COFA).

Such a deal would give the US exclusive military access while allowing Greenland to maintain formal independence.

However, Trump’s aggressive rhetoric risks alienating both Greenlanders and European allies.

For the US to play a constructive role, it must respect Greenland’s sovereignty and offer tangible benefits beyond military interests.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has recently called for direct talks with Trump, seeking to address his escalating rhetoric about Greenland.

Frederiksen stressed the importance of maintaining close US-Denmark ties while reiterating that Greenland “belongs to the Greenlanders.” 

Frederiksen expressed confidence that the dialogue would happen after Trump’s January 20 inauguration, though Trump has not yet responded to her overture.

The future of Greenland may ultimately rest on its people’s aspirations, but how the US chooses to approach this Arctic power play will reveal more about its global strategy than just its ambitions in the ice.

The post Why does Trump want Greenland? The geopolitical power play explained appeared first on Invezz

Nicolas Maduro was unexpectedly sworn in for a third term as president of Venezuela, sparking widespread national and international outrage.

In response to these actions, on January 10, the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) imposed sanctions on eight senior Venezuelan officials directly involved in Maduro’s ongoing efforts to suppress opposition and undermine democratic processes in the country.

According to a statement from the Treasury, these sanctions align with similar actions taken by international allies, including Canada, the European Union, and the United Kingdom, further strengthening the anti-Maduro coalition.

The sanctioned officials are accused of involvement in various state agencies, including the president of Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PdVSA), the Minister of Transportation, and the president of the Venezuelan Consortium of Aeronautical Industries and Air Services (CONVIASA), a state-owned airline.

OFAC has focused its sanctions on high-ranking military and police officials, who oversee the organizations implicated in alleged human rights violations committed by the Venezuelan government.

These actions were taken under Executive Order (E.O.) 13692, which targets individuals responsible for undermining Venezuela’s democratic institutions.

Bradley T. Smith, the US Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, emphasized the US government’s resolve:

“Since the election last year, Maduro and his associates have continued their repressive actions in Venezuela,” said Smith.

“The United States, along with our like-minded partners, stands with the Venezuelan people in their pursuit of new leadership and rejects Maduro’s fraudulent claim of victory.”

Repression intensifies after the elections

The Venezuelan presidential elections, held on July 28, 2024, led to increased pressure from the US and its allies for Maduro to pursue a democratic transition.

However, Maduro’s response has been to escalate his repression of the opposition, protests, and any calls for political change.

The government’s use of force and disregard for the electoral process have continued to worsen, as Maduro seeks to maintain control despite widespread condemnation.

Human rights organizations have reported a significant rise in arrests, detentions, and violence against dissenters since the elections, leaving many citizens fearful of retaliation for voicing opposition to the government.

US ramps up the pressure with stronger measures

In an effort to further deprive Maduro of the resources needed to maintain power and suppress the opposition, the US State Department has intensified its Narcotics Rewards Program.

The US is offering up to $25 million for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Maduro and Diosdado Cabello, the Minister of Interior, Justice, and Peace.

Additionally, a new reward of up to $15 million has been offered for reliable information on Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino.

The US State Department has also imposed new visa restrictions on at least 2,000 Maduro-aligned officials, “who deliberately undermine the electoral process and facilitate acts of repression.”

These restrictions are an essential tool for isolating and holding accountable the Maduro administration’s enforcers.

Global solidarity with Venezuela’s citizens

The involvement of international partners highlights a growing global consensus that the Venezuelan people deserve a transition toward democracy and justice.

While Maduro deepens the country’s repression, the united efforts of the US and its allies send a strong message that democracy, accountability, and human rights are non-negotiable and must be upheld worldwide.

The ongoing sanctions and diplomatic efforts not only demonstrate solidarity with Venezuelan citizens but also reject Maduro’s illegitimate rule, reinforcing the global call for genuine democratic governance in Venezuela.

As the international community remains firm in its stance, there is hope that the voices of the Venezuelan people will ultimately prevail in their fight for freedom and democracy.

The post US Treasury sanctions Venezuelan officials backing Maduro’s ‘repression and illegitimate power grab’ appeared first on Invezz