Human needs in this world cannot be separated from 3 basic needs, namely shelter, clothing and food. Clothing is one of the things that humans will always use from birth to the end of their life no matter rich or poor because everyone needs clothes during their life. The industrial sector that produces this clothing is the garment industry, the garment industry is a company engaged in the manufacture of apparel for men and women, for all ages from baby to adults. Product from garment examples such as underwear, shirts, jeans, t-shirts, jackets, blouses, etc. and usually these garment products are mass-produced with the same model. Characteristics of garments produced by garments are the models of clothing that are made usually have the same shape, garment clothing generally uses standard sizes (S, M, L, XL) or numbering (Fitinline, 2019). There are lots of garment factories in each country and usually the factory has chosen the targeted market segment according to the product production. However, there are still many obstacles that can occur in this garment industry. Among other things, the rapid changes in the garment industry so that innovation must be carried out every time because fashion is always evolving, causing this industry have to adapt to the trends that are popular with the community, as well as high competition due to the many existing garment factories so that characteristics and expertise are needed to survive. However, when a garment factory can produce products with brands that have strong characteristics, Models that are trendy and comfortable to wear, the brand can quickly become a favorite of the community and with the right promotion can build branches in several countries.
If the garment industry is an industry that focuses on apparel, then above the garment industry there is an industry that is wider in scope, namely the textile industry is one of the manufacturing industry sectors that produces starting from raw materials to become materials that have a selling value such as yarn, cloth, and finished products made from textiles. The textile industry is very large because it consists of several materials. There are natural materials such as silk, wool, and cotton. And there are also synthetic materials, namely polyester, polypropylene, nylon. As for the process of making yarn into fabric, there are 3 types, namely woven, knitted and nonwoven. Woven itself is a fabric making technique that has the principle of combining threads lengthwise and transversely or making patterns that cross each other, while knitted fabrics are fabrics made with the principle of entangling threads that are intertwined with each other to form a circle or arch so that the threads can relate to each other. Then nonwoven is a fabric that is made without going through the woven and knitting process but with a special nonwoven machine. Fabrics made with different techniques have different purposes and functions depending on the use and purpose of use.
By seeing the importance of textiles in everyday life and because textiles are an industry that will always be needed, it is not surprising that the demand for textiles is always increasing from time to time. So that countries that have large textile production can make textiles one of the economic sources for state income. Here are 3 countries with the largest textile production in the world:
It’s not new anymore if China dominates the global textile market because this country is able to have an output reaching 52.2% of global textile production in 2019. Several factors that support China to become a giant ruling textile industry are due to low production costs, technological advances that as well as, considerable supply of raw materials. These things make China the largest textile producing country in the world. In addition to being the largest textile producer, China is also the country that exports the highest textiles. From Statista data, in 2020 China was the top global textile exporter with a value of around USD 154 billion. This figure of China’s exports is almost 43.5% of the total textile export market worldwide (Inda Susanti, 2022).
India occupies the second position as the largest textile producing country in the world, textile is one of the oldest industries in India and the development of this industry is always increasing from time to time. In India there is a division into 2 sectors. The first sector is an unorganized sector that still uses human labor and simple tools. Then the second sector is an organized sector, namely a sector that is more modern because it uses combined techniques and machines. India’s textile industry is estimated to be worth USD250 billion in 2019. According to the IBEF report, India’s State textile industry accounted for 7% of industrial output in 2018/2019. It contributes 2% to India’s GDP and employs more than 45 million people in 2018/2019 (Inda Susanti, 2022).
United States of America (USA)
America is in the 3rd position with the largest textile production. America managed to account for 5.3% of the output of global textile production in 2019. The biggest strength of textiles from the United States of America comes from the production of nonwoven fabrics, medical textiles and protective clothing. By combining advanced technology and innovation, the United States continues to grow with textile production increasing every year. Citing data from the US National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO), the total value of shipments of US-made fibers and filaments, textiles and apparel amounted to approximately USD76.8 billion in 2018, up from USD73 billion in output in 2017 (Inda Susanti, 2022).
It is estimated that the demand for textiles in the future will continue to increase with the development of technology, there will be many new innovations that can be useful for human life. Especially in the garment and textile industry sector. As one of the basic human needs, it is estimated that the industry will remain stable and continue to increase, although sometimes there will be a decline but will return to a stable position. So literally the garment industry is part of the textile industry as well. However, the garment industry has a main focus on making apparel. Meanwhile, the textile industry has a wider scope because it processes from raw materials into finished materials that are ready to be reprocessed or can be sold directly without being reprocessed.
Moving BRICS Forward with the New Global Order
The New Masters of the New Big Economy
Laboratory Assistant at Universitas Islam Indonesia
BRICS creating early warning system for epidemic risks
The IPEF’s Impact on the Asia-Pacific Economy and Regional Cooperation
Biden forces Russia to retake all of Ukraine, and maybe even Lithuania
The Global-south Geopolitical and Geoeconomic Landscape and China’s Growing Influence
America and the World: A Vital Connection
On May 23, President Biden declared the official start of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework in Japan, ushering in a new phase in the Asia-Pacific conflict between the United States and China. China’s policy has taken on two distinct aspects since the Biden administration took office.
One example is Trump’s gradual shift from a full-fledged trade war with China to “precise decoupling” in crucial areas such as high technology. The economic conflict between China and the United States appears to be escalating. The temperature has dropped, but the trend of decoupling continues to increase; the second is to actively court European and Asia-Pacific friends and partners, and strive to construct a global supply chain, industrial chain, and value chain system that excludes China by enacting new international norms.
In the Atlantic, the United States and Europe announced the formation of the United States-EU Trade and Technology Committee (TTC) on June 25, 2021; in the Asia-Pacific, the Biden administration can abandon efforts to contain China by returning to the TPP (later renamed the CPTPP) and instead seek an alternative that requires only an executive order to take effect.
In this regard, President Biden initially floated the concept of establishing an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) during the East Asia Annual Summit in October 2021, and then disclosed further specifics in February 2022 until his visit to Japan in May to make the formal announcement. Begin the initiative. The establishment of the Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific economic framework is not only a legacy of Obama’s return to the Asia-Pacific strategic heritage, but also the first step toward establishing a global geoeconomic framework to constrain China.
Regarding the potential impact of IPEF on the economy and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region, I believe it may be sensibly regarded from two perspectives. First, while IPEF’s negative impact should not be understated, its dividing effect on the Asia-Pacific region should not be overstated. On the day of the IPEF’s launch, Biden announced that seven ASEAN countries will join as founding members at the same time, which may exceed the expectations of many scholars and politicians, some of whom believe that ASEAN is shifting the traditional strategy of great power balance in favor of the US.
As a result, IPEF will hasten the fragmentation of the Asia-Pacific area. This point of view has merit, and it implies, to some extent, that ASEAN is willing to support the US’s efforts to create new international rules and so-called safer and more resilient global supply chains against China, thereby strengthening its relationship with the US. economic linkages and cooperation, and seize the opportunities that the decoupling of the US and Chinese value chains may bring to itself.
However, it would be premature to claim that ASEAN has entirely shifted in favor of the US. In reality, ASEAN’s option is still a classic great power balance approach. Since the beginning of the Asia-Pacific regional cooperation process in 1997, following the East Asian financial crisis, ASEAN has made full use of its geoeconomic and political strategic position, historically assuming the “centrality” of regional cooperation under the international pattern of competition between China, the United States, and Japan,” and becoming the “driver” to promote the final establishment of regional economic groups such as RCEP.
ASEAN is able to pursue a policy of great power balance in international and regional affairs because of its unique status and character. The seven ASEAN nations elected to join the IPEF, which appears to benefit the US, but it is more likely that the rapid nature of the construction of the Indo-Pacific economic framework, the ambiguity of the substance, and the optionality of the negotiating agenda have given countries a lot of leeway.
If it is totally devoted to the United States, ASEAN would lose its “central position” in regional cooperation and regional issues, as well as its current international stature. ASEAN countries will most likely have a firm grasp on this.
Second, the eventual impact of the IPEF on the Asia-Pacific economy and cooperation is dependent on China’s realistic policy decisions rather than the United States’ strategic plan, which is full of political calculations. The IPEF has established four pillars of trade, supply chain, clean energy infrastructure, and taxes and anti-corruption, but its essence is merely a “lack of a market” fundamental hollow endeavor, and the US market opening pledge is precisely what ASEAN nations are most concerned about.
As a result, unless the Biden administration addresses domestic anti-globalization sentiment and economic concerns, and then merges IPEF with existing free trade accords (such as the CPTPP led by Japan), it will be difficult for the US to create long-term collaboration with ASEAN nations. excitement. However, given the present political ecosystem in the United States, this is nearly impossible.
On the contrary, after decades of economic and trade cooperation and value chain integration, China, ASEAN, and other Asia-Pacific countries have formed a regional production and division of labor network with the world’s most complete industrial structure, most complex supply chain, and deepest interdependence. In comparison to the United States and Japan, China’s relevance to the ASEAN economy has steadily increased.
China surpassed Japan to become ASEAN’s top commercial partner in 2009. In that year, the three nations contributed for 11.6 percent, 9.7 percent, and 10.5 percent of ASEAN’s total import and export trade. Since then, the distance between China, the United States, and Japan has significantly expanded.
The entire trade volume between China and ASEAN will reach US$518.1 billion in 2020, significantly above the US$204.6 billion and US$308.9 billion between the US and ASEAN. As a result of this modification, the aforesaid proportions are now 19.4 percent, 7.7 percent, and 11.6 percent, respectively. The ever-expanding trade scale inevitably reflects into China’s enormous influence over ASEAN.
According to the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS) in Singapore’s 2019-2022 State of Southeast Asia Survey, China has significantly greater influence in the area than the United States, both economically and politically. In the four surveys, for example, more than 70% of respondents believe China has the greatest economic influence, while less than 10% agree with the United States; more than 45 percent believe China has the greatest political and strategic influence, while only about 30% agree with the United States.
As a conclusion, in the face of IPEF competition from the United States, China may relax. China should have confidence in stabilizing cooperation with ASEAN as long as China continues to adhere to the policy of opening up to bring greater dividends to ASEAN, adhere to ASEAN’s “centrality” in regional cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region, and firmly implement the principle of peaceful coexistence and joint building of a community of shared destiny with ASEAN countries.
As the two most dynamic countries in the Asia-Pacific area, the dynamic Asia-Pacific supply chain and value chain will not break, and the process of economic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region will not stagnate, as long as the industrial ties between China and ASEAN are not severed.
Under auspices of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and China holding the 14th Summit, it provides the platform to address emerging global and thorny regional problems. The BRICS member countries collectively represent about 26% of the world’s geographic area and are home to 2.88 billion people, about 40% of the world’s population.
What are the issues at stake: During the past two decades, new geopolitical confrontation as between democracy and authoritarianism, and unipolar and multipolar system, have partly appeared between the United States and Europe on one side and Russia and China on the other side. There other ccountries that are followers of the these distinctive groups. The group deeply dissatisfied about unipolar system and global hegemony throttled by the United States.
Despite the individual differences, BRICS members ultimately seek to consolidate its position, with a number of instruments at hand, in the development of the new global order and therefore have the following:
(i) Unified front and expansion of the group, demonstrate its effectiveness in addressing emerging tasks on regional and international stage. For instance in May, China suggested launching discussions of the issue that Argentina and Saudi Arabia had expressed interest in joining BRICS.
According to experts, other potential candidates include Bangladesh, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Uruguay who joined the BRICS New Development Bank last year. In addition, analysts point out that events held on the sidelines of the BRICS foreign ministers meeting involved representatives of Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Nigerian and Thailand.
A number of countries are already on the list as potential new members. The final positions is that this geopolitical configuration is in exploratory phases, undoubtedly meant to bring a new axis of Russia-China but inclusion of Mexico , Indonesia and Turkey has its own strategic baggage. The procedures have to be thoroughly examined and reviewed, the dialogue is of importance to further expand BRICS.
(ii) The question of creating an international reserve currency based on a basket of currencies of the BRICS countries is being considered. In addition, the development of reliable alternative mechanisms for international settlements is being drawn up together with BRICS partners.
Russia’s financial messaging system is open for the connection of banks of the five countries. The geography of Russia’s Mir payment system is being expanded. The fact is that there are comprehensive measures directed at reducing the negative impact of sanctions and strengthening trade and investment ties with all interested states.
(iii) On fortifying the economic front is one key area for BRICS. Russia is feverishing cooperating with China and India. Trade among them has witnessed exponential growth, and Russia is set to make new legislations that could facilitate further, especially in the Central Asian region and within the Eurasian Union.
Closely relating to that Russia is advocating for expanding entrepreneurial freedoms, reducing administrative burdens, launching new preferential lending programs, and introducing tax and customs exemptions. While these aim at supporting Russia’s economy against raft of draconian sanctions, it would simultaneous help China, India and many Asia-Pacific countries that are ready to do mutual business with Russia.
Against these backdrop as briefly discussed above, BRICS can serve as an opportunity for the group to convince the world that it can be a viable financial option against Western-led institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Furthermore, combined together they possess a huge resources and only need to present a “clear-cut economic model” that ultimately be attractive and be replicated around the world. BRICS countries constitute 40 percent of the world’s population, and the group needs to engage in more interactive development processes especially the global south to get more clout as a serious global player.
China is holding the BRICS presidency in 2022. While strengthening economic, technological and scientific potential, the BRICS partners are ready to continue working on principles of respect to interests of each other, unconditional supremacy of international law, and equality of countries and peoples of the globalized world.
The 14th BRICS summit held in June, the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa focused on the state of affairs and prospects of multifaceted cooperation within the group in the political, economic, cultural and humanitarian areas. The summit touched upon pressing international and regional issues and are reflected in the summit’s final declaration.
Since its establishment, the BRICS success could be described as moderate. The group has a combined population of 3.23 billion and their combined GDP is more than US$23 Trillion. Historically, the first meeting of the group began in St Petersburg in 2005. It was called RIC, which stood for Russia, India and China. Then, Brazil and subsequently South Africa joined later in February 2011, which is why now it is referred to as BRICS.
There is only one “Big Economy” within each nation; a unique economic development process harnessed around the assembly of small and medium businesses spread across any given nation. Nevertheless, mastery to lead the “Big Economy” requires big minds; so long, the small-minds only see small business as small; failing to recognize that all big businesses of the world only hatched as small babies in the past. Later, after many diaper changes SME grew into giants. This is normal in the life of a business cycle for any entrepreneurially fertile business minded landscapes.
Let there be light: Nevertheless, as a simple fact, like turning an ‘on’ and ‘off’ light switch; economies without digitization are as if without electricity, without upskilled frontline teams on tasks as if without a bulb. The Mindset Hypotheses openly challenges the visible damages to economic developments across the free world equally as monitor to growth the sooner tested across SME regions the faster the turnaround.
Fake entrepreneurialism: Unfortunately, the lack of mastery of the Big Economy is a big issue. Academia is always uncomfortable with SME, job creator entrepreneurial mindsets, for being too much out of the box rule breaker, while nestled in their own Ivey covered moist edifices feel cozy with their own job-seeker mindsets while claiming expertise on some fake entrepreneurialism of sorts. Issuing papers as wall hanging and passing judgments on entrepreneurial journeys, without once creating a single SME. Entrepreneurialism is not a degree; it is a state of mind. A quick live debate will prove all this, hence the deep silence.
Is China showing mastery in harnessing its big economy of SME? Observe across the world how much powers acquired by optimizing their SME sectors, upskilling of exporters, reskilling of manufacturers and quadrupling exportability. Now, compare this to the openly visible abuse and abundance of the SME within the free economies of the world, critically damaging levels of skills and leaving national citizenry behind in the races of global age competitiveness now in post pandemic revival left almost in salvage states.
Five Big Myths of Economic Development Debunked:
The political syndrome: politics is not creating the economical answer, as an overview, observe the art of the politics; reflected in their national leaderships of their free economies and their election wizardry all now almost gone to the dogs. Observe the chaos, nation by nation. Notice the salvage operations and runaway elections, watch the language, the populist narratives and pre-anarchy landscapes. Political power is about creating economic powers or else.
National mobilization of entrepreneurialism will save nations: The current global level rhetoric at global institutions already mandated to foster economic growth, mostly going in circles and lip servicing, geo-econo-socio-politico issues with visible absence of real concrete workable solutions. Such verbiage, followed by thousands of trade groups and chambers all joining the same chorus lines and echoing the same rhetoric visible on social media by the hours but critically lacking any hard core national mobilization programs. Of course, it takes special mindsets for special challenges, like airlines flown by trained pilots and not by frequent flyers. Acquire mastery on mobilization methodologies… why large number mobilization requirements are a mystery and why not just regular class size do?
The economic crisis fabrication: The challenge is “economy” and nothing else but economy. Here observe the assembly of casual, randomly picked expertise at play in managing the most complex and difficult puzzles of survival of humankind, the local grassroots prosperity. Notice, the majority of national crises, from economy, jobs, immigrations, crime, and education, housing or health all related to local grassroots prosperity.
What level of high schooling is required to decipher such puzzles? What we have, nation-by-nation, like some paintings- by-the-number to create masterpieces for the history of the economic museum. So what is wrong? Why is the big economy so neglected, why SME sectors are fragmented and buried under bureaucracies, red-tapes and old mentality trade groups and chambers lingering like left over burden declared some abstract SME with no future, all due to lack of job creator entrepreneurial mindsets. Absence of mastery on economic development now openly visible
Economy is not about numbers rather entrepreneurialism
The number syndrome: A calculator from a ‘dollar store’ is often sufficient as the Economy of the past is in numbers, but the economy of the future is all about entrepreneurialism. Growth is a by-product of job creator entrepreneurial mindset. Psychologist and HR both are allowed to break-up the furniture infinitum on this, but unless the mindset hypotheses is smashed, job seekers will build the organizations and job creators will create that organization in the first place; the visible damage to our economic development widespread across the free economies of the world as failure. Find answers fast
The error of mind: The term “SME” is a grave error, a misnomer created by job seeker mindset, as there is nothing small about a baby elephant. It will become an elephant in time. It is all about creating a big new company, active within a big economy of million small medium large businesses within a nation. However, such tasks must break away from the current economic development models serving selected interests, brutal toward SME treating them as small and of lesser value, unable to decipher the hidden powers of risky new business models. Mandatory study of 1000 earth-shattering entrepreneurs is necessary to avoid mistakes about the large national SME sectors treated as leftovers and spillovers from the undesired job creator mindsets. Close study and testing will prove the lingering harsh realities.
The big loss of a nation: The biggest loss to any nation is the wasteland of the ‘job creator entrepreneurial mindsets’ abandoned across the nation as lingering SME as undecipherable journeys of businesses for the formally attired degree holders as tall towers occupants of the job seekers mindsets. Lack of knowledge on properly structured Digitization, Mobilization, Exportization and global age immersion of new trades of micro exports, micro manufacturing and global competitiveness. Provided such progress led by entrepreneurial mindsets.
Throw away Teleprompters: as lip service on SME all but dried out, the only fact remains, that the SME economy by far the “Big Economy” in search of big minds, ignorance on small business fertility is a harsh lesson of today. Today, the art and science now hidden in balancing both, the job seeker and job creator mindsets to mobilize entrepreneurialism and create economic growth. Seek out authoritative dialogues and create bold open debates
The unpredictability of elections: Tragically, the cryptopia mentality stripped naked the unskilled citizenry of most free economies. Rather than creating internal Skill-Wars to create upskilling and reskilling, the leadership chose to declare Forever-Fake-Wars so their nations learn slowly to dig their own graves as metaverse therapy. Now in need of diaper change the next rounds of elections will sort out the ongoing damages. Prepare for mega change
Check the profiles on LinkedIn: Today, openly visible, across the world, on LinkedIn profiles, the Job seeker mindsets now freely running the economic development progress of the free economies of the world. What is most damaging is the absence of a job creator entrepreneurial mindset creating input and global age narratives on national mobilization of entrepreneurialism.
Absence of such mastery is visibly sinking the experimental economic development in a big way. A quick test will prove such imbalances but this requires entrepreneurial leadership to tackle such timely challenges, otherwise all failed to collect dust as some long undecipherable academic study. For authoritative analysis and special workshops on acquiring mastery on such topics, study more on Google.
Big minds urgently required; Big minds needed to deal with big economies, based on global collaboration, diversity and tolerance, as rest is crypto-tyrannies. Creating real value economic power is the ultimate leadership goal to lead a sovereign nation, as the rest is fakery. Without a big economy, get ready for the big bust; Study the origin and history of business, the art of value creation to allow differentiation to eliminate the value manipulation. The rest is easy.
Right from the time of Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam has adopted a liberal socialist welfare state emulating the erstwhile USSR....
Israeli forces were behind the fatal shooting of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in the West Bank – not...
In their final declaration, leaders of the BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) at the end of...
Over the last decade, security cooperation between Australia and the EU has grown. Increasing security and defence cooperation with governments...
On May 23, President Biden declared the official start of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework in Japan, ushering in a new...
Modern Diplomacy media monitoring shows that only four African leaders were present at the Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky’s address to...
At the beginning of 2018, the number of mobile phones in use surpassed the number of humans on the planet,...
How did America become ruled by its military-industrial complex?
Shanghai’s Lockdown and Its Dire Economic Impact
Hydrogen heads home to challenge oil and gas as local energy supply
Looking for safety in security studies: Is it relevant to discuss climate change’s impact on UNSC?
Decoding Biden’s Saudi Arabia-Israel visit
The New Masters of the New Big Economy
Can cryptocurrencies be used as a geopolitical weapon? The case of Central African Republic
G20 Indonesia: Steps Towards Sustainable Environmental Sustainability