Well, heading back to their wonderful country . . . via Bermuda; so, the long way 'round.

I trust the trade agreement involving Scotland is for both "whiskey" and 'whisky' (details matter in legal documents). 😁
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has been a military alliance of like-minded states with broadly similar cohering interests. In many respects, it was looking for a mission, with the result that peacemaking/nation-building missions came to be its main occupation, with many missions into various Balkan states as well as Afghanistan becoming the norm. Let's not mention Libya. Large-scale, peer-to-peer conflict (i.e. Russia), although nominally still the central mission, was definitely not a priority, given the state of European military budgets and procurement over the past 20 years. Sadly, it took until the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, not the 2014 invasion, for European states to review their defence. Even then, it took a kick in the pants from Trump to concentrate minds.

Will the US and NATO part ways? Maybe. But in my recollection, European/EU defence has been much talked about for nearly 40 years without any serious steps being undertaken. The EU, by design, though dominated by France and Germany, has many conflicting interests, and finding the multinational coherence found in NATO (with the US) presents significant challenges. From personal experience, when the Europeans tried ops without a heavy US presence - Libya - it was a significant challenge. And that was working within the NATO construct. To my mind, what the US brings in military capability is scale, depth, breadth: compared to Europe, it is greater than the sum of its parts. And this brings the political weight and leadership that is difficult (though not impossible) in the EU. Thus, for example, a single American battlegroup deployed to the EFP brings a political-military weight that is really currently unmatchable. How will a European NATO/EU match this weight?

What next? Ironically, I think that the continued heavy US presence precludes a strong Europe. The cheapest option and the path of least resistance has been to let the US do the heavy lifting. That has to change, whilst we, IMHO, have to keep the US as a politically engaged partner. The recent NSS signalled that the US would be willing to maintain an interest in Europe, but its main effort (outwith N America) is East Asia. The challenge will be dealing with the Ugly American currently in the WH, whilst Europe (re-)builds a credible military capability and comes up with a future security framework that keeps America engaged and interested. Have you noticed some European nations quietly strengthening bilateral ties with the US? Reasonable hedging, IMO.

Russia? Yes, it's been in decline for 40 years. Doesn't mean it isn't dangerous or that it can't pose significant future problems for Europe. The bottom line IMO is that if Russia isn't within a European security framework, it will be within one with China; the latter is the current direction of travel, but not one that is in our interest. The challenge is to secure Ukraine's sovereignty and security, whilst weaning Russia from its current path. Dealing with a morally reprehensible Russia will be a Kissinger-esque challenge, a bad option or a worse option. At the moment, Trump seems to be filling a void: the worst European conflict since 1945, and it seems that Europe isn't even at the table. I know they have some leverage through Trump, but that's not the same.

Canada? Is this a moment to reflect on what our national security-defence situation is in, say, 2050? A root and branch review would inevitably put our long-term relationship with the US to the forefront, but presumably, a review of military commitments to Europe is also necessary. IIRC, Pierre Trudeau briefly considered withdrawal from NATO. Inevitably, finite resources entail hard decisions and a cost-benefit analysis on where our national interest lies would be of value. Interested in people's thoughts on a long-term (mid-21st C) horizon.
 
www.bbc.com

Trump says he will hike tariffs on EU cars to 25%

The current level of tariffs charged on goods entering the US from the EU is 15%, under a deal negotiated last July.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

Trump says he will hike tariffs on EU cars to 25%

Donald Trump is increasing the tariffs charged on cars and trucks from the European Union to 25%. Trump says he will hike tariffs on EU cars to 25%

Donald Trump is increasing the tariffs charged on cars and trucks from the European Union to 25%. The US president accused the EU of "not complying with our fully agreed to trade deal" in a post on Truth Social, but did not explain how. "I am pleased to announce that
 next week I will be increasing Tariffs charged to the European Union for Cars and Trucks," Trump said on Friday. The current level of tariffs charged on goods entering the US from the EU is 15%, under a deal negotiated last July. Trump's latest announcement marks a sharp escalation in trade tensions between Washington and Brussels. Talks about how to move forward on last summer's deal had stalled over a dispute on steel and aluminium, with major European economies like Germany and France rejecting U.S. plans to adjust tariffs on a wide range of goods. Cars are a vital industry for Europe, so it marks a particularly sensitive target for Trump to pick. The trade deal agreed between the EU and US, at Trump's Turnberry golf course in Scotland, set levies on most European goods at 15%. It was a reprieve for the EU from the 30% tariffs Trump had threatened to impose as part of his "Liberation Day" wave of tariffs that April. In exchange, Europe had agreed to invest in the US and make changes on the continent expected to boost US exports. As tensions mounted over President Trump's threats to annex Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory, the European Parliament in January suspended the approval of the deal. It later included a clause stating the deal can be suspended if the Trump administration is deemed to have "undermined the objectives of the deal, discriminated against EU economic operators, threatened member states' territorial integrity, foreign and defence policies, or engaged in economic coercion". It was approved by the European Parliament in March, following the dispute. Announcing the tariff hikes, Trump urged European carmakers to shift production to the US. "It is fully understood and agreed that, if they produce Cars and Trucks in U.S.A. Plants, there will be NO TARIFF," his Truth Social post read. He said billions of dollars are being invested in car and truck plants across the country, figures he described as "a record in the history of car and truck manufacturing". "There has never been anything like what is happening in America today," Trump added. Trump's Liberation Day tariffs, imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), have since been ruled illegal by the Supreme Court, with firms that paid up now seeking refunds after a Supreme Court decision. But the tariffs affecting cars fall under a different legal process, and are not impacted by the Supreme Court ruling.
 
lenaitch said:
Well, heading back to their wonderful country . . . via Bermuda; so, the long way 'round.

I trust the trade agreement involving Scotland is for both "whiskey" and 'whisky' (details matter in legal documents). 😁
Click to expand...
Only Charles went to Bermuda; Camilla returned to the UK, so he's half right.
 
Richard White said:
I highly doubt that any of the arab states would be ok with that.

The Gulf states like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc have power and influence. This is not like the Gulf of Mexico where a large chunk is bordered by the US.

If Trump tried to pull a stunt like that it would backfire on him in a second.
Click to expand...
They probably don't care because he's unlikely going to get it.
 
It’s amazing that one country with less than 5% of the global population and about 14% of the Global purchasing power has such an oversized impact on global trade, relations and security. Is anyone going to put this pretence to bed and discover that the emperor is wearing no clothes?
 
Northern Light said:
Back to the UHN announcement.....the official press release is out now:

www.uhn.ca

Healthcare Scientists Recruitment Campaign - UHN

We focus on recruitment of scientists whose research has the potential to fuel economic development, Canadian-based manufacturing and jobs.
www.uhn.ca www.uhn.ca
Click to expand...

Since I stuck this here originally..........I'll follow up.

UHN's Canada Leads initiative, trying to poach global scientific talents they might otherwise have been unable to attract, in light of the cuts to the NIH in the U.S. is out hyping its success.

www.theglobeandmail.com

University Health Network recruits senior NIH investigator, more than 70 global scientists

Campaign to attract best and brightest aims to bring in 100 early- to mid-career scientists from other countries
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com

From the above:

1777895568150.png


The primary move here was to attract early career scientists, grad students and just beyond, looking to establish. The logic was sound, the still early-in-career crew are generally cheaper, more hungry and open to moving, and potentially give you someone for most or all of their working life.......

That said, UHN has also poached a few leading scientists while they were at it.

1777895755488.png


1777895817505.png
 
nightstreak said:
The guy is verifiably insane. It just shows how irresponsible the GOP is to let him hold the reins of power.
Click to expand...
This is kind of a consequence of system design. The Americans have designed an electoral system that is easily hacked by a cult of personality. Most Republican congressional seats are so Gerrymandered that the only real election is the primary, where candidates endeavor to out-crazy each other to secure the party nomination. Trump has a strong enough cult of personality that most congressional republicans can't stand up to him for fear of being primaried. There will have to come a time when Trump has consumed too much good will from his base that the republicans feel confident knifing him like Caesar.
 
afransen said:
This is kind of a consequence of system design. The Americans have designed an electoral system that is easily hacked by a cult of personality. Most Republican congressional seats are so Gerrymandered that the only real election is the primary, where candidates endeavor to out-crazy each other to secure the party nomination. Trump has a strong enough cult of personality that most congressional republicans can't stand up to him for fear of being primaried. There will have to come a time when Trump has consumed too much good will from his base that the republicans feel confident knifing him like Caesar.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I feel the only way out from this Trump debacle is with his death.
 
nightstreak said:
The guy is verifiably insane. It just shows how irresponsible the GOP is to let him hold the reins of power.
Click to expand...
Compounded by how he's taken to sharing outright, unabashed, self-proclaimed QAnon memes *now* (as opposed to a few years ago when he could pretend to aw-shucks innocence)

www.independent.co.uk

Trump elevates QAnon conspiracy theory in late-night Truth Social post

President Donald Trump posts reminder of the claim that the ‘shadowy cabal that runs the world’ will be overthrown
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk

If there's any proof that we might have a lunatic death/suicide cult in the making, there it is.
 

Inside Palm Beach County’s newly signed Trump trademark deal for airport renaming

Palm Beach County commissioners will take their first public vote Tuesday on the renaming of Palm Beach International Airport after Donald Trump, now that county officials have reached a tentative trademark deal with the president’s companies following weeks of negotiations. The controversial deal is unusual: other airports named after presidents don’t have trademarks owned by private companies. Trump’s companies and Palm Beach County administrators have argued the trademark agreement is necessary to protect the county from lawsuits, not for private profit. A copy of the agreement signed by Trump Sunday and reviewed by the Miami Herald, however, shows it could leave openings for Trump’s businesses and family members to benefit from the taxpayer-funded airport name change. For one, the agreement is non-exclusive to Palm Beach County. While Trump’s companies agreed not to receive royalties or revenue for the sale of Trump-branded items at the airport, the non-exclusivity clause leaves an opening within the agreement for Trump’s companies to sell airport-branded items off-site for profit, according to trademark attorney Josh Gerben. Trump’s company also gets to make a list of “approved retailers” from which airport stores have to buy their airport-branded merchandise. If the county or any retail business want to sell products with the airport’s name on it, they have to purchase those products “exclusively and directly from such entities designated by Licensor.” The licensor in this case is DTTM Operations, LLC, which manages Trump’s trademarks and secured the trademark for “Donald J. Trump International Airport” in February. Donald Trump Jr. is the president of DTTM, according to his signature on the draft agreement. The agreement states that while Trump and his affiliates can’t profit from the purchase or sale of these Trump airport branded items, they do have the power of determining who gets to manufacture them. “That’s also unusual,” Gerben said. “Normally a license agreement says that the goods have to be of a certain quality. It doesn’t say that you have to purchase them from a retailer that we’re approving them from.” Another notable provision in the agreement gives Trump veto power over how his biography is presented at the airport, ensuring he can strike down information he finds unflattering. The county is allowed to use Trump’s name, image and biographical information to market and promote the airport, according to the agreement, but Trump’s companies get to approve or deny any of these uses beforehand. “It’s not just a non-partisan individual that’s going to be able to write marketing materials or talk about Donald Trump. It’s going to be him and his organizations getting to control the messaging here,” Gerben said.

Many of the other details of the agreement are similar to typical commercial trademark agreements, he said. The agreement proposes an official eagle-centric logo for the airport that looks like a pared-down version of the presidential seal. The Trump Organization did not immediately respond to questions about the agreement. Palm Beach County Administrator Joseph Abruzzo said tomorrow’s commission vote on the deal is key to the airport renaming: “Commissioners have to agree, however, we are required by state law to get [a deal] done.”

Emails obtained by the Miami Herald between Palm Beach County administrators and state lawmakers late last year show that the county was concerned that the airport renaming “confers a commercial benefit upon the president and his companies” and questioned whether the county should be compensated for handing free publicity over to Trump. The county raised a litany of other safety and legal concerns in December, before lawmakers approved the bill or Gov. Ron DeSantis signed it into law. Many of those issues were mitigated by the requirement added to the bill that the county reach a trademark deal with Trump’s companies, county administrators told the Herald. DeSantis signed the law forcing the name change in late March, but it only takes effect if the county reaches a deal for the trademark. Some of the county’s safety concerns, however, still hinge on whether the state agrees to pay the $5.5 million the county says it will take to implement the name change without siphoning money from other projects, like “roof and elevator replacement.” The Florida Legislature has not passed a budget for next year yet; they’re set to meet for a special session to do so in the coming weeks. Palm Beach County commissioners have not previously taken a public vote or position on the new law forcing them to rename the airport — meaning Tuesday’s vote on the trademark deal will be the first time the local commissioners will publicly address the planned Trump tribute.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top