World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares79 Views

      in US Politics

      Elephants and rhinos at increased risk of poaching due to Trump funding cuts, groups say

      by

      Environmentalists have urged the Trump administration to reverse its decision to cut off funding for key conservation work aimed at saving iconic at-risk species, including anti-poaching patrols for vulnerable rhinos and elephants.International conservation grants administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) have been frozen by Trump, throwing conservation non-profits around the world into disarray. These grants, amounting to tens of millions of dollars, help protect imperiled species in countries that lack the US’s financial muscle to combat threats such as poaching.An environmental group, the Center for Biological Diversity, said it would sue the FWS if the funding isn’t restored. It said the money is vital for patrols safeguarding rhinos in Africa, which have suffered a 94% population decline over the past century, as well as efforts to reduce human-elephant conflict and help conserve species such as freshwater turtles and monarch butterflies.“The Trump administration’s funding freeze for anti-poaching patrols and other international conservation work is maddening, heartbreaking and very illegal,” said Sarah Uhlemann, international program director at the center.“These Fish and Wildlife Service funds help protect elephants, rhinos and other animals across the globe that Americans love. No one voted to sacrifice the world’s most iconic wildlife to satisfy some unelected billionaire’s reckless power trip.”In a letter to the FWS, the center said that the funding halt violated the US Endangered Species Act, which requires the government to consider at-risk species in its decisions, and flouted proper agency procedure in rescinding funding. “This insanity has to stop or some of the world’s most endangered animals will die,” said Uhlemann.The freeze on grants is part of a broader crackdown on US foreign aid by Trump and his billionaire backer Elon Musk. A judge has ordered the freeze to be reversed, although the administration has yet to comply with the directive.In his previous term in office, Trump sought to weaken the Endangered Species Act and has set about trying to bypass the conservation law during his latest term. The president has demanded that a little-known committee, nicknamed “the God squad” due to its ability to decide if a species becomes extinct, help push through fossil fuel and logging projects in the US even if they doom a species.Experts have said that the use of the committee in this way is likely illegal. A court case may now unfold over the stymying of FWS grants for international conservation, too.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAlongside illegal poaching, legal hunting tours in Africa are popular with some Americans, including Donald Trump Jr, who was pictured holding a severed elephant’s tail more than a decade ago.The FWS was contacted for comment on the potential lawsuit. More

    • 113 Shares50 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘The relationship is broken’: Canadians respond to Trump’s tariffs

      by

      “Since Donald Trump began his tariff threats against Canada and his ‘jokes’ about making Canada the 51st US state, I have not bought a single product originating in the US,” said Lynne Allardice, 78, a retired business owner from New Brunswick, Canada.“Not a single lettuce leaf or piece of fruit. I have become an avid reader of labels and have adopted an ‘anywhere but the US’ policy when shopping. I will not visit the States while Trump remains in office, and most of the people I know have adopted the same policy.”Acquaintances, Allardice added, were selling US holiday properties they had owned for many years.View image in fullscreenMany Canadians have responded to Trump’s economic tariffs and political messaging with a consumer boycott of US products and services – no more California wines or American Bourbon; local shopping instead of Amazon Prime; analogue entertainment and cable TV instead of Netflix; holidays in the Kootenays instead of Disney World.Hundreds of people from across Canada shared with the Guardian their reactions to Washington’s political and economic gear change, and how they may be affected personally.Many expressed defiance and anger over what they saw as a hostile new US administration that was no longer an ally and, voicing economic fears and a sense of permanent loss, said they would no longer buy US goods nor cross the border again – at least while Trump was in office.Pam, a 64-year-old retired woman from British Columbia, said she and her husband had cancelled a five-week trip to Palm Springs, losing their $5,000 (£3,900) deposit. They were planning, she said, to buy a Honda truck now instead of a Ford.Many said their local supermarkets had displayed labels marking Canadian products and that they were happy to pay significantly more for non-US goods, for example 50% more for Mexican lemons; others said they hoped Canadian companies would expand offerings and services after cancelling Amazon Prime and streaming platform subscriptions.One woman from British Columbia who lives a 10-minute drive from the US border and is participating in the boycott pointed to the irony of having joined several Facebook groups promoting Buy Canadian campaigns – one of which had now ballooned to 1.2 million members.View image in fullscreenAmid fiery pledges to stand up to the US government, hundreds of Canadians shared grave concerns about the impact of the trade tariffs on their personal finances.Many said they were anxious about their retirement savings amid the market turmoil and economic uncertainty that have followed what they referred to as Trump’s “economic warfare”.Scores said hiring and budget freezes were already happening in the companies they worked for, while a number of business owners highlighted a loss of sales since Trump’s election that was likely to worsen.People working in sectors including hospitality, tourism, retail, entertainment, the wider service industry, manufacturing, the auto industry, aviation, property and construction, agriculture, marketing and financial services, among others, shared concerns about their business or line of work being negatively affected by the tariffs and resulting economic uncertainty.Ian Hallett, the owner of an architectural bureau, from Seaforth, Ontario, said: “With steel, wood and aluminum tariffs, the construction industry will be hit hard and fast, which means a slowdown in building. We will likely have to lay off staff.”The owner of a landscaping business in Calgary, Alberta, said his sector would be “highly impacted” by the tariffs. “People won’t spend money to maintain or redesign their lawn. I may have to reduce my workforce and potentially shut down the season early. This will have a domino effect,” he said.View image in fullscreenAdrian, a business owner from Northern Ontario, said: “The tariffs have created chaos, anxiety and depression, a loss of hope. My US sales have dropped and if the tariffs [stay in place], I will have to close my business, as American customers are half my sales.”A 65-year-old support worker at an elementary school from Toronto said: “I’m worried my husband may lose his manufacturing job because the company he works for has a lot of American customers. Tariffs may make the building materials products his company makes too expensive.”Various business owners who were expecting a collapse in North American sales predicted that it would be impossible to make up the difference by increased exports to Europe or other parts of the world, where the markets were either saturated or shipping was too expensive.“I’m stressed about my investments and the financial markets, and I’m concerned about prices going up,” said Susan, an accountant from Toronto, mirroring the fears of many.While most of those who got in touch were outraged by Trump’s America First protectionism, scores of Canadians signalled an appetite for an isolationist approach for Canada, too.“I think that we should take a tip from Trump and build our own wall to keep the USA out,” said a 56-year-old single mother from Montreal. Scores of Canadians said they felt Canada needed to strengthen its military.Sarah from Nova Scotia said the Trump administration’s tactics and “threats against sovereignty, water, resources and territory” had “fired people up to be less dependent and integrated economically”.Antoine Delorme, a 43-year-old self-employed heavy machinery mechanic from Montreal, who has to order parts and material from the US every week, appeared to blame globalisation for Canada’s perceived vulnerability.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“With free trade, we lost a lot of economic independence. Many distributors are centralised south of the border [and] no longer need to keep Canadian facilities,” he said. Like many others, he felt Canada was now exposed, economically and militarily. “If the USA turns into a hostile neighbour, no one will be in a position to meaningfully help us,” he said.View image in fullscreenJean Whieldon, a retired journalist from Ontario, said: “We have become too dependent upon America – Trump is right about that. Who can we turn to for help and protection? Nato? The UK? Don’t make me laugh, it hurts too much.”Hundreds of people expressed fury over a perceived lack of solidarity from allied nations and were particularly critical of the British prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, and King Charles.“Canada’s relationship with the rest of the world has changed for ever,” said Katy, a finance professional from Toronto. “We just came to the stark realisation that allies are an illusion. As we endure the Maga onslaught, our supposed ‘allies’, including Britain, remain silent. Our ‘head of state’, King Charles, remains silent. Nato countries remain silent. We will weather the economic storm, but [I am] not so sure about our relationships with other nations.”Canada, Katy added, could leave international partnerships as it was “blessed with innumerable natural resources”. “If things don’t change, then Canada needs to extricate itself and consider becoming a neutral country. Dismantling the constitutional monarchy is now a must. The Commonwealth is dead.”Hundreds of Canadians reported a palpable, freshly ignited rise of patriotism, as well as a kind of nationalism usually frowned upon in Canada.“Canadians have become much more nationalistic,” said a woman from Ontario. “Some of us have been booing at the US national anthem at hockey games, which is not typical Canadian behaviour. We are furious about the tariffs that will deeply hurt Canadian businesses and quite likely see other companies move their operations south of our border.”View image in fullscreenDonna, a retired woman living in a small city in British Columbia, said: “We have lost our trust in the USA as a friendly country. Patriotism was never something that Canadians celebrated enthusiastically. Today I see more Canadian flags than I have ever seen – in front yards, hanging from porches and hedges, and adorning cars. Both sides of the political spectrum and a majority of citizens are much more united than before.”A woman in her 40s from British Columbia who works in tech agreed: “There’s a huge sense of national unity around the country, and a lot of focused action to build our nation up.” She said she had “quit the US cold turkey”.“This is a shift unlike any I have seen in my lifetime, and unlike anything my parents have seen either. Canada is turning away from the US – if not forever, at least for a long time. Goodbye America, we’ll miss what we had, but not what you have become.”While some people said they were differentiating between the Trump administration and their American neighbours, others shared feelings of personal hostility towards the American population, saying they wanted to “stick it to” their “poorly educated neighbours to the south”, as one woman from British Columbia put it, echoing the remarks of many.Scores of Canadians said they had fallen out with American friends and even family members over the political tensions between the two countries and ideological disagreements over American and Canadian democracy, freedoms and Trump himself.View image in fullscreenA silver lining to the economic upheaval, various people pointed out, were renewed efforts to improve intra-Canadian trade between provinces.Matt, 41, a university employee from Vancouver Island, said: “Having a common opponent in the USA is drawing many people of my vast country together in ways that were seemingly impossible just a year ago. The work being done to dismantle inter-provincial trade barriers, with the potential to add tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to our economy, would never have had the political backing without Canada facing a significant external threat.”Most Canadians who got in touch felt that ties between Canada and the US had been permanently damaged.“The relationship is broken,” said Allardice, the pensioner from New Brunswick. “A great many Canadians hate the USA now. How can you remain on good terms with a neighbour who threatens your economy and jokes about bringing you to your knees?” More

    • 313 Shares50 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is tearing up the rights of women. The message from your sisters in the Arab world? Don’t give up: resistance works | Hibaaq Osman

      by

      From outside the US looking in, those of us who have experienced the tumultuous years since the Arab revolutions feel a strange sense of familiarity: the chaos of the Trump-Musk administration, the attacks on minority groups, the elevation of men – a number of whom have been accused of violence against women – to cabinet positions.Trump seems to have started his second term with the same ferocity, callousness, violence and ignominy in which his first term so notoriously ended. Amid the shock of the past few weeks, a sense of panic can be immobilising. But that is exactly what such a strategy is designed to do.For women in the US who now feel under attack like never before, who sense their rights, even their bodily autonomy, slipping through their fingers, I bid a weary but warm welcome to the club. You must know that you do not need to look far for solidarity. There are women in the US who have had to fight every step of the way to have their humanity recognised by a bigoted and over-mighty state. African American women, Indigenous American women, Latin American women – their civil rights struggles have been extraordinary and hugely influential across the world.But if I may, there are many examples to be shared of women in the Arab world who have taken on the laws, institutions and cultures of oppression that mired their daily lives – and won.With some US politicians now looking to bar women from seeking an abortion beyond state lines, you can take inspiration from the women of Libya. Twice now, the Libyan authorities have declared their intention to ban women from independent travel without a male “guardian”. Female activists met these proposals with campaigns that raised global attention and condemnation, exerting political and diplomatic pressure that resulted in the proposals being rescinded.That this is possible in a country in which decades of dictatorship and conflict have prevented the establishment of a democratic culture shows the power of women organising together in grassroots advocacy. Even when the levers of power are not accessible directly, there is still huge power in working together strategically.When women in Jordan and Lebanon started work on addressing colonial-era laws that meant convicted rapists could escape punishment by agreeing to marry their victim, there were not many female parliamentarians they could find to champion their cause in the corridors of power. So they found other means. On social media, they developed hugely creative campaigns. Through this activism, women’s groups built coalitions that put the issue on the political agenda, with the laws abolished in both countries within days of each other.Such laws – which could still be found on the statute book in France as late as the 1990s – are based on an all-too-common belief that it is more shameful to be the victim of rape than it is to be the perpetrator. The work in Jordan and Lebanon then finds a haunting echo in the amazing courage shown last year by Gisèle Pelicot. Her case emphasises that while legal or constitutional changes are vital, the more difficult but fundamental task is to change a culture that allows such violence and discrimination to be conceived and committed at all.It makes me think of the incredible work going on in Egypt led by my colleagues reaching out to religious leaders. Over years, these activists have brought imams to engage with a study on women’s rights, gradually overcoming resistance and demonstrating compatibility with their faith.Some leaders went further, using the study in sermons and advocating for policies such as criminalising early marriage. That work has required incredible patience, persistence and compassion. It takes a lot to understand where people are coming from and to build a platform for respectful conversation, all without ceding ground or your own principles. But it can be done.Such a task of dealing with, and challenging, deeply held beliefs faces women in the US.American women did not suddenly wake up one morning to find sexual abusers in the White House. The path to this point has been long and ignominious. If things are to change for the better, the road ahead is equally long and challenging – but women can lead the way. There will be missteps, there will be failures. But nothing at all will be achieved if those disgusted and enraged by this state of affairs choose to sit back.The triumphs I have witnessed have been the fruit of years of hard work, of determination, of people being prepared to take risks. The stakes in the US show the time for playing it safe is long gone. This is a time to make noise, to find strength in solidarity and being part of a movement.The Trump administration threatens not only the health and rights of women within the US, but the progress that women have made globally. His cuts to American development, humanitarian and medical aid overseas are already having devastating consequences for women and girls facing violence, armed conflict, disaster and disease. And by cosying up to regimes notorious for perpetrating organised gender-based violence, he threatens decades of work to address the impact of conflict on women and girls.In this fight, women across the world are with our US sisters. Our cause is one – it has always been. To stand up against the injustice and inequality you see is an awesome challenge, but it is not one you are facing alone. More

    • 175 Shares88 Views

      in US Politics

      Zelenskyy says he will work under Trump’s leadership as he proposes Ukraine peace plan

      by

      Volodymyr Zelenskyy has proposed a possible peace plan to end the war in Ukraine, saying he is willing to work “constructively” under Donald Trump’s “strong leadership” and to sign a deal giving the US access to his country’s mineral wealth.In an attempt to mend fences with Washington after Trump abruptly suspended supplies of military aid, Zelenskyy said on Tuesday he was “ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible”.“I would like to reiterate Ukraine’s commitment to peace,” he wrote on X.In an extraordinary turnaround, late on Tuesday both sides appeared to be close to signing a critical minerals deal that the White House has indicated is a precursor to peace talks, Reuters reported, underlining the chaotic nature of the relationship between Kyiv and Washington under Donald Trump.Alarmed European leaders reaffirmed their backing for Kyiv on Tuesday as it emerged that Ukraine’s Nato allies had not been told in advance of the suspension of US aid.A spokesperson for the Polish foreign ministry said Trump’s announcement “was made without any information or consultation, neither with Nato allies nor with the Ramstein group which is involved in supporting Ukraine”.Meanwhile, Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, announced proposals to increase EU defence spending, which she said could raise up to €800bn ($848bn). “This is a moment for Europe, and we are ready to step up,” she said.In his comments, Zelenskyy sketched out a plan for how the war might stop. The “first stages” could include a release of prisoners and a ban on missiles and long-range drones used to attack energy and civilian infrastructure. This “truce in the air” might be applied to the sea as well, he said, “if Russia will do the same”.Zelenskyy’s post came hours after the Trump administration said it was blocking all deliveries of ammunition, vehicles and other equipment, including shipments agreed when Joe Biden was president.He acknowledged his meeting on Friday with Trump and the US vice-president, JD Vance, “did not go the way it was supposed to”. He said: “It is regrettable it happened this way. It is time to make things right. We would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive.”But his conciliatory comments appear to fall short of the grovelling apology demanded by the White House. Trump has accused Zelenskyy of disrespect, and the US president’s aides have claimed Zelenskyy provoked the row by insisting any peace deal had to come with security guarantees. Vance also repeatedly accused Ukraine’s president of ingratitude.By way of response on Tuesday, Zelenskyy thanked Trump for providing Kyiv with Javelin missiles during his first presidential term. “We really do value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence,” he said.On Tuesday, Vance denied that Trump wanted a public apology from Zelenskyy despite media reports to the contrary, saying that the “public stuff” did not matter as much as Ukrainian engagement toward a “meaningful settlement”.“We need the Ukrainians privately to come to us and say: ‘This is what we need. This is what we want. This is how we’re going to participate in the process to end this conflict,’” Vance told reporters on Capitol Hill. “That is the most important thing, and that lack of private engagement is what is most concerning.”US officials have said Zelenskyy and an adviser, Andriy Yermak, had sought the White House meeting despite the concerns of some Trump advisers who had said there was the potential for a clash. But there are also suspicions the White House was looking for a pretext to distance itself from Ukraine.At a joint session of Congress on Tuesday evening, Trump is expected to propose plans to “restore peace around the world”. A White House official told Fox News he would “lay out his plans to end the war in Ukraine”, as well as plans to negotiate the release of hostages held in Gaza, the outlet reported.Ukraine and the US were supposed to sign a minerals deal that would have resulted in the US investing in Ukraine’s underdeveloped minerals and mining sector. Trump has said the presence of US workers in Ukraine would be enough to deter Putin from future acts of aggression, with no further security promises needed.Asked whether he believed there was still hope for the minerals deal, Vance responded: “Yeah, I certainly do.” He added: “And I think the president is still committed to the mineral deal. I think we’ve heard some positive things, but not yet, of course, a signature from our friends in Ukraine.”Kyiv was ready to sign the deal “in any time and in any convenient format”, Zelenskyy indicated. “We see this agreement as a step toward greater security and solid security guarantees, and I truly hope it will work effectively,” he wrote.“It’s a temporary pause and it’s to do a reset,” Mike Johnson, the speaker of the US House of Representatives, said of the suspension of US military aid. “I am heartened by the development that President Zelenskyy has indicated that he does want to do this deal after all … I certainly encourage that to happen and he needs to come and make right what happened last week – the shocking developments in the Oval Office – and if he does that then I think this is the win-win-win scenario for everyone involved.”Moscow celebrated Trump’s decision to suspend military aid as “the best possible step towards peace”, with the Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, saying the US had been “the main supplier of this war so far”.Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, told a cabinet meeting in Warsaw that Europe faced unprecedented risks, including “the biggest in the last few decades when it comes to security”. Tusk said his government would have to make some “extraordinary” decisions. “A decision was announced to suspend the US aid for Ukraine, and perhaps start lifting sanctions on Russia. We don’t have any reason to think these are just words,” he said.“This puts Europe, Ukraine, Poland in a more difficult situation,” Tusk said, adding that Warsaw was determined to “intensify activities in Europe to increase our defence capabilities” while maintaining the best possible relations with the US.France’s foreign minister, Jean-Noël Barrot, said the US decision meant it was vital Europe helped Ukraine hold the frontline against Russia, which he said was “the first line of defence for Europe and France”. The time had come for Europe to drop its dependency on US weapons, he added. “We are faced with a choice that is imposed on us, between effort and freedom, or comfort and servitude,” he told MPs.The French prime minister, François Bayrou, said the US decision to suspend weapons aid in wartime signalled that Washington was “abandoning Ukraine and letting the aggressor win” and that it was Europe’s responsibility to replace them.Bayrou told parliament that Europeans “are going to have to think about our model, about our priorities and to look at the world differently … We have seen it is more dangerous than we had though, coming from those we thought were allies.”Germany’s foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock, said: “Two things are now essential for peace through strength: additional aid – military and financial – for Ukraine, which is defending our freedom. And a quantum leap to strengthen our EU defence.”EU leaders are scheduled to meet on Thursday to discuss a five-part, €800bn (£660bn) plan presented by the European commission to bolster Europe’s defence industry, increase military capability and help provide urgent military support for Ukraine. More

    • 175 Shares83 Views

      in US Politics

      Why this is no time for Zelenskyy to grovel to Trump | Paul Taylor

      by

      For Volodymyr Zelenskyy, this is no time to grovel.After last Friday’s ambush in the Oval Office – where the Ukrainian president, who has led his country in resistance to three years of brutal Russian aggression, was beaten up in public by Donald Trump and JD Vance – some European leaders, including Keir Starmer and the Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte, rushed to urge him to mend fences with Washington. It was bad advice – and Zelenskyy should ignore it. In any case he doesn’t have much choice.The US president and his team have since made it clear that they want his scalp as part of their plan to rush through a ceasefire deal with Moscow that would leave Ukraine partitioned, without US or Nato security guarantees, but with US companies pouring in to exploit its strategic minerals. In the mafia style that he wields so convincingly, Trump unleashed his attack dogs to call for Zelenskyy’s removal, and declared “this guy doesn’t want there to be Peace as long as he has America’s backing”. Then he pulled the plug on US military assistance to Kyiv in an attempt to force Ukraine to its knees and impose Vladimir Putin’s terms for an end to the fighting.It is now abundantly clear that the Trump administration isn’t interested in mending fences with Zelenskyy, so he would merely court more humiliation without gaining extra arms supplies or security guarantees if he went crawling to his tormentors now. The man who refused to surrender to Putin’s invasion should not yield now to Trump’s ultimatums and extortion.He would do better to pressure his European supporters to deliver fast on their promises, while dangling the same reward of access to Ukrainian rare earths if they do so. This could become part of a package for an accelerated EU accession process for Kyiv.If Trump goes further, as he may well do, and cuts off the US intelligence feed to Ukraine and access to Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite communications, European countries must step in fast to help Kyiv using the EU’s government satellite network to avoid being totally blinded. The US should beware of taking such steps, which would signal to allies around the world that neither its security partnership nor its tech companies can be relied on for dependable service in a crisis.The White House train wreck happened so fast that some European leaders are still struggling to catch up with the significance of the event. That’s understandable, since it upended their mental universe, in which the transatlantic bond was always the bedrock of European security, enabling them to live in prosperity for decades without spending too much on defence because they were under a protective US shield.Within hours of the Oval Office bust-up, Rutte said it was “important that President Zelenskyy finds a way to restore his relationship with the American president and with the senior American leadership team”. You can’t blame him for trying to hold together the alliance that pays his wages and that has kept the peace in Europe for 75 years. But Rutte is in denial about the new reality in Washington. It will take time to adjust, but we don’t have that time.Likewise, Starmer’s call for bridge-building and mending relationships with the US, even as he declared Britain’s full support for Ukraine, was an exercise in mental gymnastics at a time when the Trump administration has decided to throw Kyiv under the bus in the quest for a new bonanza in relations with Russia. The UK’s security is so intertwined with the US, including the closest of intelligence-sharing relationships and reliance on US components and targeting software for its nuclear deterrent, that no British leader ever wants to face the nightmare choice between loyalty to Ukraine’s just cause and the so-called special relationship with Washington.It’s now up to the Europeans, including the UK, to show they are willing to go on supporting Ukraine practically, by emptying their ammunition stocks to keep Kyiv supplied and ramping up industrial production to deliver a steady flow of shells. They must remove remaining self-imposed restrictions on allowing Ukraine to use medium-range missiles to strike Russian bases and supply lines. And they must draw up practical plans for a security force to support Ukraine after a ceasefire with the assumption of little or no US support, despite Starmer’s plea for a US backstop.Zelenskyy cuts both a heroic and a tragic figure. He embodied Ukrainian resistance to tyranny when Russia struck, he has been a brave war leader under fire, yet now he increasingly looks like a martyr, to be torn asunder between a vengeful Putin and an unscrupulous Trump.But Zelenskyy and Ukraine can still emerge from this war as the successful defenders of their own and Europe’s freedom, provided European countries now back him to the hilt. Even if they cannot recover every inch of stolen territory, Ukrainians should fight on under Zelenskyy’s leadership and with European support for a fairer peace.

      Paul Taylor is a senior visiting fellow at the European Policy Centre

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 175 Shares74 Views

      in US Politics

      Tariffs can help US workers. But Trump’s doing them all wrong | Dustin Guastella

      by

      In the run-up to the 2024 election, a lot of people were ringing alarms about Donald Trump’s tariffs. Kamala Harris called Trump’s policies a “tax on the American people” and warned of sky-high prices. According to the Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, they are “very bad for America and for the world”. His fellow Nobel laureate Paul Krugman called them “small, ugly, and stupid”. More recently, the whirlwind tariff drama of the past two months – first a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada, then a 30-day “pause” on that policy, a plan to raise tariffs on steel, aluminum and agricultural goods, plus an across the board tariff hike on China – has generated yet more frenzied debate about the danger of tariffs.Observers aren’t wrong to criticize the US president’s policies. His proposed tariffs seem unlikely to improve what ails the US economy. Worse, applying tariffs as broadly as he’s proposed, and without any supplementary industrial strategy, does risk needlessly raising prices while acting like a big corporate giveaway. Yet, despite what elite economists say, tariffs can be sound, and progressive, economic policy.In fact, liberals might be surprised to learn that during his administration Joe Biden actually raised the highest tariffs in recent American history: a 100% tariff on Chinese electric vehicles. Why? Because tariffs work.Tariffs are, simply put, taxes on certain imported goods, paid by the importer. The goal is to make foreign products more expensive than their Made-In-USA counterparts. This is why people refer to tariffs as “walls” that help “protect” domestic industry from global competition. Right now, China quickly and efficiently produces fleets of electric vehicles that are – thanks to the low cost of Chinese labor – a lot cheaper than the EVs made in the United States. Without tariffs, it would be impossible for US-made models to compete. Since making electric cars was a big goal for Biden, his administration raised an eye-watering tariff that would double the price of any Chinese-made import.The EV example is useful because it demonstrates the difference between Biden’s tariff policies and Trump’s.Trump has, for the most part, not focused on raising tariffs on particular imported goods but instead on all goods coming from certain countries. Mexico and Canada face across-the-board tariffs; China was already facing 10% tariffs, doubling to 20%. But raising the prices of all products from these countries doesn’t help develop any particular line of US manufacturing. Tariffs like these are both too broad and too small to make a positive impact. A 20% tariff on all Chinese goods might make it more expensive for Americans to continue to buy certain things from China. But nothing in that policy encourages Americans to buy American-made products; they might just as well find a Vietnamese supplier to avoid the tariff while continuing to reap the benefits of cheap labor. Moreover, it’s possible that some Chinese manufacturers will simply eat the additional costs and sell their goods at slightly slimmer profit margins. Or, equally likely, they will try to avoid the tariffs by having other companies assemble their products in neighboring countries before sending them to the US. As is, Trump’s country-based tariffs seem more like a geopolitical tool than an economic one. Frankly, they don’t make much sense if the goal is to bring factories home.Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs are closer to the mark. By making all steel imports (regardless of national origin) subject to the same tariff, the policy could succeed in making US steel comparatively cheaper for domestic buyers.View image in fullscreenYet even this wouldn’t make US steel bigger or better, or make its production more efficient. Nor would it necessarily raise the wages of steel workers. Pure and simple protectionism will benefit existing US steel manufacturers, but no one much beyond that. Without the government stepping in to develop new manufacturing – encouraging the adoption of the latest techniques to make a superior product, actively building new demand for American steel, or providing social guarantees for steel workers – tariffs alone risk protecting a sick industry without much upside.So what would a labor-forward tariff program look like? It would combine tariffs with big investments in infrastructure to help steer industry, and the country, into better economic health.For steel, such a fix isn’t hard to imagine. The US benefits from being a continental-sized country, with hundreds of thousands of bridges, school buildings, libraries, miles of rail and highway. All of those things are made with steel. And all of them are falling apart. Major new investments in infrastructure upgrades would provide the tariff-protected steel industry the new demand needed to grow, and provide the requisite scale for industrial dynamism.In exchange, steel firms should be required to provide family-sustaining wages and benefits, and promise to stay neutral in union elections. Not only this, but the government should have some say in actually directing the production process. New steel plants should be built in places that need jobs, not isolated tax-free industrial parks, but in the very same areas that were obliterated by deindustrialization. That is, production should be directed, first and foremost, toward public use and social ends.Some might wonder: why bother with such an expensive experiment?Manufacturing is still a huge part of the US economy and it is among the only sectors that consistently provides high wages for a large base of workers. Protecting that industrial foundation is essential not only for those workers, but for the health of other sectors too. When a factory closes, it’s not just the high-wage blue-collar workers who are thrown out of jobs. So are all the middle-income truck drivers who deliver the goods. And all the high-skilled mechanics who fix the machines. Not to mention the servers and cooks who staff now empty local restaurants. The only businesses that grow in the wake of a factory closing are those related to opioids and alcohol.Since Nafta was signed, tens of thousands of factories have closed in the US. Millions of largely union jobs have been lost. This fact alone explains so much of the populist revolt against globalization. And while it’s unlikely that we could ever return to the industrial output of 1946, is it that hard to imagine returning to 1994? If Pearl Jam is still making albums, can’t the US still make steel?Rebuilding our manufacturing capacity will be a big part of building a better country. And tariffs – deployed wisely with big investments – are an indispensable tool for doing so.

      Dustin Guastella is a research associate at the Center for Working Class Politics and the director of operations for Teamsters Local 623 More

    • 138 Shares88 Views

      in US Politics

      China and Canada retaliate after Trump trade tariffs come into effect

      by

      China and Canada unveiled retaliatory measures against the US after Donald Trump imposed his sweeping tariffs plan at midnight US time, despite warnings it could spark an escalating trade war.US tariffs have come into force of 25% against goods from Canada and Mexico, the US’s two biggest trading partners, and 20% tariffs against China – doubling the levy on China from last month.The duties will affect more than $918bn-worth (£722bn) of US imports from Canada and Mexico.China on Tuesday said it would impose fresh tariffs on a range of agricultural imports from the US next week. Its finance ministry said additional 15% tariffs would be imposed on chicken, wheat, corn and cotton, with further 10% tariffs on sorghum, soya beans, pork, beef, aquatic products, fruits, vegetables and dairy products.The Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, said Ottawa would respond with immediate 25% tariffs on C$30bn-worth ($20.7bn) of US imports. He said previously that Canada would target US beer, wine, bourbon, home appliances and Florida orange juice.Tariffs will be placed on another C$125bn ($86.2bn) of US goods if Trump’s tariffs were still in place in 21 days.“Tariffs will disrupt an incredibly successful trading relationship,” Trudeau said, adding that they would violate the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement signed by Trump during his first term.Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, was expected to announce her response on Tuesday morning, the country’s economy ministry said.Asian markets were down – after sharp falls in US markets on Monday – as Japan’s Nikkei fell 1.6%, Taiwan’s benchmark TWII index was off 0.5% and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng was down 0.$%.The Canadian dollar and the Mexican peso fell to their lowest levels in a month on Tuesday.In Europe, the FTSE 100 dropped by 57 points, or 0.65%, at the start of trading to 8,813 points, a day after rising more than 8,900 points for the first time. France’s CAC 40 fell 0.9% and Spain’s Ibex was down 0.8%.Trump and his allies claim that higher tariffs on US imports from across the world will help make America great again by enabling it to obtain political and economic concessions from allies and rivals on the global stage.Businesses, inside the US and worldwide, have warned of widespread disruption if the Trump administration pushes ahead with this strategy.Since winning November’s presidential election, the president has focused on China, Canada and Mexico, threatening the three markets with steep duties on their exports unless they reduced the “unacceptable” levels of illegal drugs crossing into the US.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhile he slapped a 10% tariff on China last month, Trump has repeatedly delayed the imposition of tariffs on Canada and Mexico. The president has pledged to bring down prices in the US, but economists have warned that consumers in the country could be aversely affected by his trade plans.A 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico and a 10% levy on China would amount to “the largest tax increase in at least a generation”, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a thinktank, which estimated such a move would cost the typical US household more than $1,200 each year.Trump has vowed to go further, threatening to introduce “reciprocal” tariffs on countries that have their own duties on goods made in the US. He has said these will come into effect as soon as next month.China’s finance ministry said in a statement: “The US’s unilateral tariff increase damages the multilateral trading system, increases the burden on US companies and consumers, and undermines the foundation of economic and trade cooperation between China and the US.”The ministry said products shipped from the US to China that departed before 10 March and arrived before 12 April would not be subject to the tariffs.Trump has said the tariffs on China are because the government has failed to stop illicit fentanyl entering the US, which Beijing says is a “pretext” to threaten China.“China opposes this move and will do what is necessary to firmly safeguard its legitimate interests,” a foreign ministry spokesperson, Lin Jian, said.Chris Weston, an analyst at the brokerage Pepperstone, said: “Market anxiety levels have been dialled up, and we see traders having to react aggressively and dynamically to the deluge of headlines and social posts confirming that tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada are to be implemented in full and as threatened.” More