International Trade

Colombia announced the move after US President Donald Trump called President Gustavo Petro an ‘illegal drug leader’.

Colombia has said it has recalled its ambassador to the United States, after US President Donald Trump threatened to cut off aid and made disparaging remarks about the Colombian president over the weekend.

The South American country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Monday that Ambassador Daniel Garcia-Pena had already arrived in Bogota to meet with President Gustavo Petro, whom Trump called an “illegal drug leader” on Sunday.

The growing feud between the two countries has centred on US strikes in the Caribbean on vessels that the Trump administration alleges are transporting drugs, mostly from Venezuela. Those strikes, which have killed dozens of people and are widely viewed as a violation of US and international law, have drawn strong criticism from Petro.

In a social media post on Sunday, Trump said aid to Colombia would be cut off and threatened that if Petro did not take more steps to combat the drug trafficking in the country, the US would do the task itself, “and it won’t be done nicely”.

Colombian Interior Minister Armando Benedetti said on Monday that he viewed those remarks as “a threat of invasion or military action against Colombia”.

“I can’t imagine closing down some hectares [of drug production sites] unless it’s in that way, unless it’s by invading,” he added.

The US also announced over the weekend that it had struck a vessel from Colombia on Friday, alleging that it was helmed by a left-wing rebel group involved in the transport of drugs. The Trump administration has not provided evidence regarding those claims.

Petro responded in a series of social media posts, stating that one of those killed in the attack was a Colombian fisherman named Alejandro Carranza, who did not have any ties to drug trafficking.

“US government officials have committed murder and violated our sovereignty in territorial waters,” he wrote.

Jose Raul Mulino says the visa-removal policy is ‘not coherent’ with the ‘good relationship’ he hopes to have with the US.

Panama President Jose Raul Mulino said that someone at the United States Embassy has been threatening to cancel the visas of Panamanian officials.

His statements come as the administration of US President Donald Trump pressures Panama to limit its ties to China.

Responding to a reporter’s question at his weekly news conference, Mulino said — without offering evidence — that an official at the US Embassy is “threatening to take visas”, adding that such actions are “not coherent with the good relationship I aspire to maintain with the United States”. He did not name the official.

The US Embassy in Panama did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Trump administration has previously declined to comment on individual visa decisions.

But in September, the US Department of State said in a statement that the country was committed to countering China’s influence in Central America. It added that it would restrict visas for people who maintained relationships with China’s Communist Party or undermined democracy in the region on behalf of China.

Earlier this week, the Trump administration revoked the visas of six foreigners deemed by US officials to have made derisive comments or made light of the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk last month.

Similar cases have surfaced recently in the region. In April, former Costa Rica President and Nobel Peace Prize winner Oscar Arias said the US had cancelled his visa. In July, Vanessa Castro, vice president of Costa Rica’s Congress, said that the US Embassy told her her visa had been revoked, citing alleged contacts with the Chinese Communist Party.

Panama has become especially sensitive to the US-China tensions because of the strategically important Panama Canal.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Panama in February on his first foreign trip as the top US diplomat and called for Panama to immediately reduce China’s influence over the canal.

Panama has strongly denied Chinese influence over canal operations but has gone along with US pressure to push the Hong Kong-based company that operated ports on both ends of the canal to sell its concession to a consortium.

Mulino has said that Panama will maintain the canal’s neutrality.

“They’re free to give and take a visa to anyone they want, but not threatening that, ‘If you don’t do something, I’ll take the visa,’” Mulino said Thursday.

He noted that the underlying issue — the conflict between the US and China — “doesn’t involve Panama”.

Stellantis announced a $13bn investment in the US, which will see production of the Jeep Compass move to the US from Canada.

Canada has threatened legal action against carmaker Stellantis NV over what Ottawa says is the company’s unacceptable plan to shift production of one model to a United States plant.

On Wednesday, Minister of Industry Melanie Joly sent a letter to Stellantis CEO Antonio Filosa noting that the company had agreed to maintain its Canadian presence in exchange for substantial financial support.

“Anything short of fulfilling that commitment will be considered a default under our agreement,” she said. If Stellantis did not live up to its commitment, Canada would “exercise all options, including legal”, she said.

Stellantis announced a $13bn investment in the US on Tuesday, a move that it said would bring five new models to the market. As part of the plan, production of the Jeep Compass will move to the US state of Illinois from a facility in Brampton in the Canadian province of Ontario.

A copy of the letter was made available to the Reuters news agency. The existence of the letter was first reported by Bloomberg.

Stellantis had paused retooling of the Brampton plant in February, shortly after US President Donald Trump announced tariffs against Canadian goods, upending the highly integrated North American auto industry.

In a statement on Tuesday night, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney said Ottawa had made clear it expected Stellantis to fulfil the undertakings it had made to the workers at the plant.

“We are working with the company to develop the right measures to protect Stellantis employees,” he said.

Ontario is Canada’s industrial heartland and accounts for about 40 percent of its national gross domestic product (GDP).

“I have spoken with Stellantis to stress my disappointment with their decision,” Ontario Premier Doug Ford said on social media on Wednesday.

Stellantis spokesperson LouAnn Gosselin said the company was investing in Canada and noted plans to add a third shift to a plant in Windsor, Ontario.

“Canada is very important to us. We have plans for Brampton and will share them upon further discussions with the Canadian government,” she said in an emailed statement.

The United States and China have started charging additional port fees on ocean shipping firms that move everything from holiday toys to crude oil, making the high seas a key front in the trade war between the world’s two largest economies.

A return to an all-out trade war appeared imminent last week, after China announced a major expansion of its rare earths export controls, and US President Donald Trump threatened to raise tariffs on Chinese goods to triple digits.

But after the weekend, both sides sought to reassure traders and investors, highlighting cooperation between their negotiating teams and the possibility they could find a way forward.

China said it had started to collect the special charges on US-owned, operated, built or flagged vessels, but it clarified that Chinese-built ships would be exempted from the levies.

In details published by state broadcaster CCTV, China spelled out specific provisions on exemptions, which also include empty ships entering Chinese shipyards for repair.

Similar to the US plan, the new China-imposed fees would be collected at the first port of entry on a single voyage or for the first five voyages within a year.

“This tit-for-tat symmetry locks both economies into a spiral of maritime taxation that risks distorting global freight flows,” Athens-based Xclusiv Shipbrokers said in a research note.

Early this year, the Trump administration announced plans to levy the fees on China-linked ships to loosen the country’s grip on the global maritime industry and bolster US shipbuilding.

An investigation during the administration of former US President Joe Biden concluded that China uses unfair policies and practices to dominate the global maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors, clearing the way for those penalties.

China hit back last week, saying it would impose its own port fees on US-linked vessels from the same day the US fees took effect.

“We are in the hectic stage of the disruption, where everyone is quietly trying to improvise workarounds, with varying degrees of success,” said independent dry bulk shipping analyst Ed Finley-Richardson. He said he has heard reports of US shipowners with non-Chinese vessels trying to sell their cargoes to other countries while en route, so the vessels can divert.

The Reuters news agency was not immediately able to confirm this.

Tit-for-tat moves

Analysts expect China-owned container carrier COSCO to be the most affected by the US fees, shouldering nearly half of that segment’s expected $3.2bn cost from the fees in 2026.

Major container lines, including Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd and CMA CGM, slashed their exposure by switching China-linked ships out of their US shipping lanes. Trade officials there reduced fees from initially proposed levels, and exempted a broad swath of vessels after heavy pushback from the agriculture, energy and US shipping industries.

The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Reuters.

China’s Ministry of Commerce on Tuesday said, “If the US chooses confrontation, China will see it through to the end; if it chooses dialogue, China’s door remains open.”

In a related move, Beijing also imposed sanctions on Tuesday against five US-linked subsidiaries of South Korean shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean, which it said had “assisted and supported” a US probe into Chinese trade practices.

Hanwha, one of the world’s largest shipbuilders, owns Philly Shipyard in the US and has won contracts to repair and overhaul US Navy ships. Its entities will also build a US-flagged LNG carrier.

Hanwha said it is aware of the announcement and is closely monitoring the potential business impact. Hanwha Ocean’s shares sank by nearly 6 percent.

China also launched an investigation into how the US probe affected its shipping and shipbuilding industries.

A Shanghai-based trade consultant said the new fees may not cause significant upheaval.

“What are we going to do? Stop shipping? Trade is already pretty disrupted with the US, but companies are finding a way,” the consultant told Reuters, requesting anonymity because he was not authorised to speak with the media.

The US announced last Friday a carve-out for long-term charterers of China-operated vessels carrying US ethane and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), deferring the port fees for them through December 10.

Meanwhile, ship-tracking company Vortexa identified 45 LPG-carrying VLGCs — an acronym for very large gas carriers, a type of vessel — that would be subject to China’s port fee. That amounts to 11 percent of the total fleet.

Clarksons Research said in a report that China’s new port fees could affect oil tankers accounting for 15 percent of global capacity.

Meanwhile, Omar Nokta, an analyst at the financial firm Jefferies, estimated that 13 percent of crude tankers and 11 percent of container ships in the global fleet would be affected.

Trade war embroils environmental policy

In a reprisal against China curbing exports of critical minerals, Trump on Friday threatened to slap additional 100 percent tariffs on goods from China and put new export controls on “any and all critical software” by November 1.

Administration officials, hours later, warned that countries voting this week in favour of a plan by the United Nations International Maritime Organization (IMO) to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from ocean shipping could face sanctions, port bans, or punitive vessel charges.

China has publicly supported the IMO plan.

“The weaponisation of both trade and environmental policy signals that shipping has moved from being a neutral conduit of global commerce to a direct instrument of statecraft,” Athens-based Xclusiv said.

China has accused the United States of “double standards” after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose an additional 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods in response to Beijing’s curbs on exports of rare earth minerals.

China says its export control measures announced last week were in response to the US restrictions on its entities and targeting of Beijing’s maritime, logistics and shipbuilding industries.

Trump’s tariff threats, which come weeks ahead of the likely meeting between the US president and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, have the potential to reignite a trade war months after Washington lowered the China tariffs from 125 to 30 percent.

The actions by the world’s two largest economies threaten to ignite a new trade war, adding further uncertainty to global trade. So what’s the recent history of US trade measures against China, and will the two countries be able to resolve their differences?

Why did China tighten export controls on rare earths?

On October 9, China expanded export controls to cover 12 out of 17 rare-earth metals and certain refining equipment, effective December 1, after accusing Washington of harming China’s interests and undermining “the atmosphere of bilateral economic and trade talks”.

China also placed restrictions on the export of specialist technological equipment used to refine rare-earth metals on Thursday.

Beijing justified its measures, accusing Washington of imposing a series of trade curbs on Chinese entities despite the two sides being engaged in trade talks, with the last one taking place in Madrid, Spain last month.

Foreign companies now need Beijing’s approval to export products containing Chinese rare earths, and must disclose their intended use. China said the heightened restrictions come as a result of national security interests.

China has a near monopoly over rare earths, critical for the manufacture of technology such as electric cars, smartphones, semiconductors and weapons.

The US is a major consumer of Chinese rare earths, which are crucial for the US defence industry.

At the end of this month, Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea, and experts speculate that Beijing’s move was to gain bargaining advantage in trade negotiations with Washington.

China’s tightening of restrictions on rare earths is “pre-meeting choreography” before Trump’s meeting with Xi, Kristin Vekasi, the Mansfield chair of Japan and Indo-Pacific Affairs at the University of Montana, told Al Jazeera.

How did Trump respond?

On October 10, Trump announced the imposition of a 100 percent tariff on China, effective from November 1.

“Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position … the United States of America will impose a Tariff of 100 percent on China, over and above any Tariff that they are currently paying,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.

He added that this would come into effect on November 1 or before that. Trump added that the US would also impose export controls on “any and all critical software”.

Earlier on October 10, Trump accused China of “trade hostility” and even said he might scrap his meeting with Xi. It is unclear at this point whether the meeting will take place.

“What the United States has is we have a lot of leverage, and my hope, and I know the president’s hope, is that we don’t have to use that leverage,” US Vice President JD Vance told Fox News on Sunday.

How did China respond to that?

China deemed the US retaliation a “double standard”, according to remarks by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson on Sunday.

China said that Washington had “overstretched the concept of national security, abused export control measures” and “adopted discriminatory practices against China”.

“We are living in an era of deeper intertwining of security and economic policies. Both the US and China have expanded their conceptions of national security, encompassing a range of economic activities,” Manoj Kewalramani, chairperson of the Indo-Pacific Studies Programme at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore, India, told Al Jazeera.

“Both have also weaponised economic interdependence with each other and third parties. There are, in other words, no saints in this game.”

Kewalramani said that China started expanding the idea of “national security” much earlier than others, especially with its “comprehensive national security concept” introduced in 2014.

Through this, China began to include many different areas, such as economics, technology, and society, under the term “national security”. This shows that China was ahead of other countries in broadening what counts as a national security issue.

China threatened additional measures if Trump went ahead with his pledge.

“Willful threats of high tariffs are not the right way to get along with China. China’s position on the trade war is consistent: we do not want it, but we are not afraid of it,” the Chinese Commerce Ministry spokesperson said in a statement.

“Should the US persist in its course, China will resolutely take corresponding measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests,” the statement said.

What trade measures has the US taken against China in recent history?

2025: Trump unleashes tariff war

A month after taking office for his second term, Trump signed an executive order imposing a 10 percent tariff on all imports from China, citing a trade deficit in favour of China. In this order, he also imposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada. China levied countermeasures, imposing duties on US products in retaliation.

In March, the US president doubled the tariff on all Chinese products to 20 percent as of March 4. China imposed a 15 percent tariff on a range of US farm exports in retaliation; these took effect on March 10.

Trump announced his “reciprocal tariffs,” imposing a 34 percent tariff on Chinese products. China retaliated, also announcing a 34 percent tariff on US products. This was the first time China announced export controls on rare earths.

Hours after the reciprocal tariffs went into effect, Trump paused them for all his tariff targets except China. The US and China continued to hike tit-for-tat levies on each other.

Trump slapped 145 percent tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting China to hit back with 125 percent tariffs. Washington and Beijing later cut tariffs to 30 percent and 10 percent, respectively, in May, then agreed to a 90-day truce in August for trade talks. The truce has been extended twice.

December 2024: The microchip controls are tightened

In December 2024, Trump’s predecessor, former US President Joe Biden, tightened controls on the sale of microchips first introduced on October 2022.

Under the new controls, 140 companies from China, Japan, South Korea and Singapore were added to a list of restricted entities. The US also banned more advanced chip-making equipment to certain countries. Even products manufactured abroad with US technology were restricted.

April 2024: Biden signs the TikTok ban

Biden signed a bill into law that would ban TikTok unless it was sold to a non-Chinese buyer within a year. The US government alleged that TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance was linked to the Chinese government, making the app a threat to national security.

ByteDance sued the US federal government over this bill in May 2024.

In September this year, Trump announced that a deal was finalised to find a new owner of TikTok.

October 2023: Biden introduces more restrictions on chips

In October 2023, Biden restricted US exports of advanced computer chips, especially those made by Nvidia, to China and other countries.

The goal of this measure was to limit China’s access to “advanced semiconductors that could fuel breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and sophisticated computers that are critical to [Chinese] military applications,” Gina Raimondo, who was secretary of the US Department of Commerce during the Biden administration, told reporters.

Prior to this, Biden signed an executive order in August 2023, creating a programme that limits US investments in certain high-tech areas, including semiconductors, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence, in countries deemed to be a security risk, like China.

October 2022: Biden restricts Chinese access to semiconductors

Biden restricted China’s access to US semiconductors in October 2022. The rules further expanded restrictions on chipmaking tools to include industries that support the semiconductor supply chain, blocking both access to American expertise and the essential components used in manufacturing the tools that produce microchips.

Semiconductors are used in the manufacturing of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. The US government placed these restrictions back then to limit China’s ability to acquire the ability to produce semiconductors and advance in the technological race.

The restrictions made it compulsory for entities within China to apply for licences to acquire American semiconductors. Analysis by the US-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace described these licences as “hard to get” back then.

Recently, some US lawmakers are calling for even more restrictions, warning that China could quickly reverse-engineer advanced semiconductor technologies on its own, outpace the US in the sector, and gain a military edge.

May 2020: Trump cracks down on Huawei

In May 2020, the US Bureau of Industry and Security intensified rules to stop Huawei, the Chinese tech giant, from using American technology and software to design and make semiconductors in other countries.

The new rules said that semiconductors are designed for Huawei using US technology or equipment, anywhere in the world, would need US government approval before being sent to Huawei.

May 2019: Trump bans Huawei

Trump signed an executive order blocking Chinese telecommunications companies like Huawei from selling equipment in the US. The Shenzhen-based Huawei is the world’s largest provider of 5G networks, according to analysis by the New York City-based think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Under this order, Huawei and 114 related entities were added to a list that requires US companies to get special permission (a licence) before selling certain technologies to them.

The rationale behind this order was the allegation that Huawei threatened US national security, had stolen intellectual property and could commit cyber espionage. Some US lawmakers alleged that the Chinese government was using Huawei to spy on Americans. The US did not publicise any evidence to back these allegations.

Other Western countries had also cooperated with the US.

March 2018: Trump imposes tariffs on China

During his first administration, Trump imposed sweeping 25 percent tariffs on Chinese goods worth as much as $60bn. In June of 2018, Trump announced more tariffs.

China retaliated by imposing tariffs on US products. Beijing deemed Trump’s trade policies “trade bullyism practices”, according to an official white paper, as reported by Xinhua news agency.

In September 2018, Trump issued another round of 10 percent tariffs on Chinese products, which were hiked to 25 percent in May 2019.

During the Obama administration (2009-2017)

In 2011, during US President Barack Obama’s tenure, the US-China trade deficit reached an all-time high of $295.5bn, up from $273.1bn in the previous year.

In March 2012, the US, European Union, and Japan formally complained to China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) about China’s limits on selling rare earth metals to other countries. This move was deemed “rash and unfair” by China.

In its ruling, the world trade body said China’s export restraints were breaching the WTO rules.

In 2014, the US indicted five Chinese nationals with alleged ties to China’s People’s Liberation Army. They were charged with stealing trade technology from American companies.

What’s next for the US-China trade war?

Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), which is set to begin on October 31.

But the latest trade dispute has clouded the Xi-Trump meeting.

On Sunday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, downplaying the threat: “Don’t worry about China, it will all be fine! Highly respected President Xi just had a bad moment. He doesn’t want Depression for his country, and neither do I. The U.S.A. wants to help China, not hurt it!!!”

In an interview with Fox Business Network on Monday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said, “President Trump said that the tariffs would not go into effect until November 1. He will be meeting with [Communist] Party Chair Xi in [South] Korea. I believe that meeting will still be on.”

When it comes to which of the two players is more affected by the trade war, Kewalramani said that he thinks “what matters is who is willing to bear greater pain, endure greater cost”.

“This is the crucial question. I would wager that Beijing is probably better placed because Washington has alienated allies and partners with its policies since January. But then, China’s growing export controls are not simply aimed at the US. They impact every country. So Beijing has not also endeared itself to anyone,” Kewalramani said, pointing out how Trump’s tariffs and China’s rare earth restrictions target multiple countries.

“The ones affected the most are countries caught in the midst of great power competition.”

On Sunday, US VP Vance told Fox News about China: “If they respond in a highly aggressive manner, I guarantee you, the president of the United States has far more cards than the People’s Republic of China.”

Kewalramani said that so far, Beijing has been more organised, prepared and strategic than the US in its policies.

“That said, it has overreached with the latest round of export controls. US policy, meanwhile, has lacked strategic coherence. The US still is the dominant global power and has several cards to play. What matters, however, is whether it can get its house in order.”

Beijing says it will not back down in the face of threats, urging the US to resolve differences through negotiations.

China has called United States President Donald Trump’s new tariffs on Chinese goods hypocritical as it defended its curbs on exports of rare earth elements and equipment, while stopping short of imposing additional duties on US imports.

In a lengthy statement on Sunday, China’s Ministry of Commerce said its export controls on rare earths, which Trump had labelled “surprising” and “very hostile”, were introduced in response to a series of US measures since their trade talks held in Madrid, Spain, last month.

“China’s stance is consistent,” the ministry said in a statement posted online. “We do not want a tariff war but we are not afraid of one.”

Trump on Friday retaliated to the Chinese curbs on rare earth exports by announcing a 100 percent tariff on Chinese exports to the US and new export controls on critical software, effective from November 1.

Beijing cited Washington’s decision to blacklist Chinese firms and impose port fees on China-linked ships as examples of what it called “provocative and damaging” actions, calling Trump’s tariff threat a “typical example of double standards”.

“These actions have severely harmed China’s interests and undermined the atmosphere for bilateral economic and trade talks. China firmly opposes them,” the ministry said.

Unlike earlier rounds of tit-for-tat tariffs, China has not yet announced any countermeasures.

Rare earths have been a major sticking point in recent trade negotiations between the two superpowers. They are critical to manufacturing everything from smartphones and electric vehicles to military hardware and renewable energy technology.

China dominates the global production and processing of these materials. On Thursday, it announced new controls on the export of technologies used for the mining and processing of critical minerals.

The renewed trade tensions between the world’s two largest economies also risk derailing a potential summit between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea later this month. It would have been their first face-to-face encounter since Trump returned to power in January.

The dispute has also rattled global markets, dragging down major tech stocks and worrying companies reliant on China’s dominance in rare earth processing.

The US president’s announcement comes after China pledged to impose restrictions on the export of rare earth minerals.

United States President Donald Trump has suggested he may scrap a planned meeting with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping this month over questions of technology and trade.

Trump and Xi had been expected to meet on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit at the end of this month, in an attempt to lower economic tensions.

But in a social media post on Friday, Trump criticised China over the new controls it announced on the export of rare earth metals. The US president also threatened China with the possibility of steep tariffs.

“I have not spoken to President Xi because there was no reason to do so. This was a real surprise, not only to me, but to all the Leaders of the Free World,” Trump said. “I was to meet President Xi in two weeks, at APEC, in South Korea, but now there seems to be no reason to do so.”

The relationship between Trump and his Chinese counterpart has been rocky, and both have imposed new measures aimed at countering each other in areas where they are competing for influence, such as technological development.

Rare earth metals are vital for such development, and China leads the world in refining the metals for use in devices like computers, smart phones and military weaponry.

On Thursday, China unveiled a suite of new restrictions on the exports of those products. Out of the 17 elements considered rare earth metals, China will now require export licences for 12 of them.

Technologies involved in the processing of the metals will also face new licensing requirements. Among the measures is also a special approval process for foreign companies shipping metallic elements abroad.

China described the new rules as necessary to protect its national security interests. But in his lengthy post to Truth Social, Trump slammed the country for seeking to corner the rare-earths industry.

“They are becoming very hostile, and sending letters to Countries throughout the World, that they want to impose Export Controls on each and every element of production having to do with Rare Earths, and virtually anything else they can think of, even if it’s not manufactured in China,” Trump wrote.

The Republican president warned he would counter with protectionist moves and seek to restrict China from accessing industries the US holds sway over.

“There is no way that China should be allowed to hold the World ‘captive,’ but that seems to have been their plan for quite some time, starting with the “Magnets” and, other Elements that they have quietly amassed into somewhat of a Monopoly position,” Trump said.

“But the U.S. has Monopoly positions also, much stronger and more far reaching than China’s. I have just not chosen to use them, there was never a reason for me to do so — UNTIL NOW!”

The Trump administration had previously imposed massive tariffs on China, one of the US’s largest trading partners.

But those tariffs were eventually eased after the two countries came to an agreement for a 90-day pause that is set to expire around November 9.

The US has previously taken aggressive steps aimed at hobbling China’s tech sector, which it views as a key competitor to its own.

“Our relationship with China over the past six months has been a very good one, thereby making this move on Trade an even more surprising one,” Trump said. “I have always felt that they’ve been lying in wait, and now, as usual, I have been proven right!”

Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney is on his second visit to the White House in five months as he deals with increasing pressure to address US tariffs on steel, autos and other goods that are hurting Canada’s economy.

Carney and United States President Donald Trump met at the White House on Tuesday.

“From the beginning, I liked him, and we’ve had a good relationship,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, sitting next to Carney.

“We have natural conflict. We also have mutual love … you know we have great love for each other,” he added, saying the two men would discuss tariffs including potentially lowering tariffs on key Canadian sectors as part of efforts to ease trade tensions between Washington and Ottawa.

More than 77 percent of Canada’s exports go to the US.

A Canadian government official and several analysts played down the chances of an imminent trade deal with Trump and said the mere fact that discussions are continuing should be considered a success for Carney.

Among the topics up for discussion are trade and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which is critical to Canada’s economy and is up for a review next year.

Trump said he was willing to revisit the free trade agreement, which was enacted during his first term, or seek “different deals.”

“We could renegotiate it, and that would be good, or we can just do different deals,” he said. “We’re allowed to do different deals.”

Trump exhibited a fondness for Carney, something he didn’t display toward Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau. He described Carney as a “world-class leader” and said he’s a tough negotiator.

The prime minister last visited the Oval Office in May, when he bluntly told Trump that Canada would never be for sale in response to Trump’s repeated threat to purchase or annex Canada.

Since then, the prime minister has made numerous concessions to Canada’s biggest trading partner, including dropping some counter tariffs and scrapping a digital services tax aimed at US tech companies.

Carney’s office has said the working visit will focus on forging a new economic and security relationship with the US.

“In areas where we compete, we have to come to an agreement that works, ” Carney said.

White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said on Monday: “I’m sure trade will be a topic of discussion … and all of the other issues that are facing both Canada and the United States.”

While the majority of Canada’s exports are entering the US tariff-free under the USMCA, tariffs have pummeled Canada’s steel, aluminium and auto sectors and a number of small businesses.

“The reality is that right now, Canadian products have among the lowest tariff rate,” said Jonathan Kalles, a former adviser to Carney’s predecessor, Trudeau. “You don’t want to poke the bear when things could be much worse,” he said, adding that any meeting with Trump is a calculated risk.

“Carney will probably get a better deal through private negotiations, not the pomp and ceremony of going to the White House,” he said.

Growing pressure

Carney won an election in April promising to be tough with Trump and secure a new economic relationship with the US.

Shachi Kurl, president of the Angus Reid Institute, said polls show Canadians have largely been willing to give Carney time to deal with Trump.

“But that amount of time is finite,” Kurl said, noting pressure may build with job losses mounting and economic growth hobbled by US tariffs.

Canada’s opposition leader, Pierre Poilievre, has criticised Carney’s approach to Trump, noting the prime minister’s earlier pledge to “negotiate a win” by July 21. He said on Monday that it did not look like Carney would accomplish much in the trip.

Dominic LeBlanc, the minister responsible for Canada-US trade, said in response that Canada has work to do on sectoral tariffs.

“Was the leader of the opposition suggesting that if the president of the United States invites us to go to Washington for a meeting and a working lunch, we should have just said ‘no’ and hung the phone up?” LeBlanc said in Parliament.

Asa McKercher, a specialist in Canada-US relations at St Francis Xavier University, said Carney’s meeting with Trump would be a success if there is any recognition that Canada has moved to address some of Trump’s persistent grievances.

“Carney has just set up this new defence agency and boosted military spending, so it would be great if Trump could reduce some of those sectoral tariffs on autos,” McKercher said, citing Trump’s past complaint that Canada is a “military free rider”.

Last month, US President Donald Trump had said he would introduce new tariffs to protect the manufacture of medium- and heavy-duty trucks from outside competition.

United States President Donald Trump has said that all medium- and heavy-duty trucks imported into the country will face a 25 percent tariff rate starting November 1, a significant escalation of his effort to protect US companies from foreign competition.

Trump made the announcement on Monday.

Last month, Trump had said heavy truck imports would face new duties on October 1 on national security grounds, saying the new tariffs were to protect manufacturers from “unfair outside competition” and that the move would benefit companies such as Paccar-owned Peterbilt and Kenworth and Daimler Truck-owned Freightliner.

Under trade deals reached with Japan and the European Union, the US has agreed to 15 percent tariffs on light-duty vehicles, but it is not clear if that rate will be set for larger vehicles.

The Trump administration has also allowed producers to deduct the value of US components from tariffs paid on light-duty vehicles assembled in Canada and Mexico.

Larger vehicles include trucks for delivery, garbage pickup, and public utilities; buses for transit, shuttles, and schools; tractor-trailer trucks; semitrucks; and heavy-duty vocational vehicles.

Impact on allies

The US Chamber of Commerce earlier urged the US Commerce Department not to impose new truck tariffs, noting the top five import sources are Mexico, Canada, Japan, Germany, and Finland, “all of which are allies or close partners of the United States posing no threat to US national security”.

Mexico is the largest exporter of medium- and heavy-duty trucks to the US. A study released in January said imports of those larger vehicles from Mexico have tripled since 2019 to around 340,000 today, according to government statistics.

Under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) trade deal, medium- and heavy-duty trucks move free of tariffs if at least 64 percent of a heavy truck’s value originates in North America, via parts like engines and axles, raw materials such as steel, or assembly labour.

Tariffs could also affect Chrysler’s parent company Stellantis, which produces heavy-duty Ram trucks and commercial vans in Mexico. Stellantis had been lobbying the White House not to impose steep tariffs on its Mexican-made trucks.

Sweden’s Volvo Group is building a $700m heavy-truck factory in Monterrey, Mexico, due to start operations in 2026.

Mexico is home to 14 manufacturers and assemblers of buses, trucks, and tractor trucks, and two manufacturers of engines, according to the US International Trade Administration.

Mexico opposed new tariffs, telling the US Commerce Department in May that all Mexican trucks exported to the US have on average 50 percent US content, including diesel engines.

Last year, the US imported almost $128bn in heavy vehicle parts from Mexico, accounting for approximately 28 percent of total US imports, Mexico said.

Trump had imposed a 40 percent US tariff on Brazilian goods in July on top of a 10 percent one earlier even though the United States has a trade surplus with Brazil.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has asked United States President Donald Trump to lift the 40 percent tariff imposed by the US government on Brazilian imports.

The leaders spoke for 30 minutes by phone on Monday. During the call, they exchanged phone numbers in order to maintain a direct line of contact, and President Lula reiterated his invitation for Trump to attend the upcoming climate summit in Belem, according to a statement from Lula’s office.

Shortly after, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he had had a good conversation with Lula.

“We discussed many things, but it was mostly focused on the Economy, and Trade, between our two Countries,” Trump said.

He added that the leaders “will be having further discussions, and will get together in the not too distant future, both in Brazil and the United States”.

The Trump administration had imposed a 40 percent tariff on Brazilian products in July on top of a 10 percent tariff imposed earlier. Lula reminded Trump that Brazil was one of three Group of 20 (G20) countries with which the US maintains a trade surplus, according to the Brazilian leader’s office.

The Trump administration has justified the tariffs by saying that Brazil’s policies and criminal prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro constitute an economic emergency.

Earlier this month, Bolsonaro was convicted of attempting a coup after losing his bid for re-election in 2022, and a panel of the Supreme Court sentenced him to 27 years and three months in prison.

In September, Trump and Lula had a brief encounter at the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, with Trump hailing their “excellent chemistry”.

During Monday’s call, Lula also offered to travel to Washington to meet with Trump, his office said.

Latest move underscores efforts to normalise ties and draw closer in wake of Trump’s policies, stiff tariffs.

India and China plan to resume direct flights this month between some of their cities after a five-year suspension as relations between the two countries begin to thaw, Indian authorities have announced.

The closer ties come in the face of the United States President Donald Trump administration’s aggressive trade policies.

Direct flights between the two countries were suspended during the COVID pandemic in 2020 and did not resume as Beijing and New Delhi engaged in prolonged border tensions.

On Thursday, India’s embassy to China said in a post on social media platform WeChat that flights between designated cities will resume by late October, subject to commercial carriers’ decisions.

The resumption is part of the Indian government’s “approach towards gradual normalization of relations between India and China,” the embassy added.

India’s largest carrier IndiGo announced on Thursday that it would resume flights from Kolkata, India, to Guangzhou, China, from October 26.

The resumption comes after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited China for the first time in seven years to attend last month’s meeting of regional security bloc, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

There, Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed that India and China were development partners, not rivals, and discussed ways to strengthen trade ties amid global tariff uncertainty fuelled by Trump.

The US president raised the tariff rate on Indian imports to a stiff 50 percent last month, citing the nation’s continuing purchases of Russian oil. He also urged the European Union to slap 100 percent tariffs on China and India as part of his efforts to pressure Moscow to end its war in Ukraine.

Relations between China and India plummeted in 2020 after security forces clashed along a disputed border in the Himalayan mountains. Four Chinese soldiers and 20 Indian soldiers were killed in the worst violence in decades, freezing high-level political engagements.

US President Donald Trump announced earlier this week that his administration would launch a new website, called TrumpRx, which will allow American consumers to buy prescription drugs from pharmaceutical companies at discounted prices.

Pfizer, the first United States pharmaceutical group to sign up to the website, said it would offer discounts of up to 85 percent on the cost of its medicines for those not using health insurance policies to pay and for those on the government’s low-cost insurance programme, Medicaid. Pfizer will also sell medicines to the Medicaid programme itself at lower prices.

The announcement prompted shares in the pharmaceuticals sector to lift sharply this week, signalling a favourable response from markets and the pharmaceuticals industry.

Here’s what we know about the new service, why it is being launched and how it will work.

What is TrumpRx and when is it being launched?

The new website will be launched in early 2026. It is a platform from which consumers will be able to buy prescription medicines directly from pharmaceutical companies without going through insurance.

On the site, consumers will be able to search for the prescription drug required and then be directed to the drug’s manufacturing company.

They will have access to discounted prices much closer to those typically paid by national health services in foreign countries at what are known as “most favoured nation” prices.

Beneficiaries of Medicaid – the federal government insurance programme for adults and children from lower-income backgrounds – will also be able to use the site.

“By taking this bold step, we’re ending the era of global price gouging at the expense of American families,” Trump told a news conference on Tuesday.

What are ‘most favoured nation’ prices?

“Most favoured nation” (MFN) prices are those that national health services in other countries, including Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Denmark, pay US pharmaceutical companies for prescription drugs.

As these countries buy medicines in bulk, they have much greater purchasing power to demand lower prices than ordinary consumers. This means pharmaceutical companies tend to sell their drugs at a much lower price to other countries than they do domestically.

The US cannot leverage this sort of purchasing power because it does not have a national health service, so the government cannot influence the price of drugs in the same way.

The Trump administration argues that this means US pharmaceutical companies are effectively subsidising foreign health services while artificially inflating prices for American consumers. In May this year, therefore, he signed an executive order aimed at reducing prescription drug prices in the US, stating: “The United States will no longer subsidise the health care of foreign countries.”

When a country grants MFN status, it commits to providing the recipient country with the same trade advantages it gives to any other country with MFN status, but not necessarily the same low prices – prices still vary from country to country. However, it is understood that companies will be expected to offer drugs at their lowest selling price in any other country.

What else has Trump done about the cost of medicines in the US?

The launch of the new website is just one part of Trump’s strategy to reduce prescription medicine prices in the US.

In July this year, he sent a letter to the CEOs of 17 pharmaceutical companies ordering them to reduce their prices.

In the letter, he laid out demands and promises:

• He called on manufacturers to provide MFN prices to every single Medicaid patient.
• He required manufacturers to stipulate that they will not offer other developed nations better prices for new drugs than prices offered in the United States.
• He promised to provide manufacturers with an avenue to cut out middlemen and sell medicines directly to patients, provided they do so at a price no higher than the best price available in developed nations.
• He promised to use trade policy to support manufacturers in raising prices internationally, provided that increased revenues abroad are reinvested directly into lowering prices for American patients and taxpayers.

The new TrumpRx website addresses the first of these promises.

To address the second promise, Trump has also announced new 100 percent tariffs on imported, branded pharmaceutical products. Companies which set up production facilities and operations in the US will be exempt from these.

He cited the cost of prescription drugs as one of the reasons for levying these tariffs.

How much more do medicines cost in the US than other countries?

According to a 2022 study commissioned by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, published on the US government website, standard insulin prices in the US are as much as 10 times higher than prices in 33 OECD countries.

“Average gross prices in the US were more than 10 times prices in France and the United Kingdom; nearly nine times prices in Italy; more than eight times prices in Japan; about seven times prices in Germany; and more than six times prices in Canada,” the study found.

Many people who take insulin already pay a “net price”, which is lower than the standard price via rebates that the manufacturer agrees with insurance companies. But the net price is still, on average, 2.33 times the price paid in other countries, the report found.

Who will benefit most from this platform?

Anyone who wants to buy prescription drugs direct from pharmaceutical companies, instead of via insurance coverage, at a discounted price can use the platform.

A 2024 report from the US Census Bureau showed that about 8 percent of the US population (26 million people) did not have health insurance in 2023 – so these people may be able to benefit.

The Medicaid programme is also likely to benefit from lower prices as its deal with Pfizer includes more favourable terms. However, details of how this part of the deal will work have not been fully explained.

Currently, most Americans use insurance policies to provide medical care, so initially, most will not use the website, experts said.

Stacie B Dusetzina, professor of health policy at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, told Al Jazeera: “There are a small number of people who may be better off purchasing their medicine this way, but the majority of Americans won’t benefit from this type of model.”

However, she added: “There are other components to the deal that could save the public Medicaid programme money, but without knowing more about how that deal is structured, we can’t say for sure that it would produce savings.”

Which drug companies will sell via the new website?

On Tuesday, Trump said pharma group Pfizer was the first to sign up for the new website.

In return for direct access to consumers, the US pharmaceuticals major has agreed to lower the cost of its prescription drugs for those buying direct via the site (and not using insurance to pay), as well as those on the Medicaid programme. Customers will pay prices closer to “most favoured nation” prices, Trump said.

In a news release, Pfizer said it had “voluntarily agreed to implement measures designed to ensure Americans receive comparable drug prices to those available in other developed countries” and said it will also price “newly launched medicines at parity with other key developed markets”.

“The large majority of the Company’s primary care treatments and some select specialty brands will be offered at savings that will range as high as 85 percent and on average, 50 percent,” the company said in a statement.

The White House and Pfizer gave some examples of primary-care Pfizer medicines which will be available on the TrumpRx website. This is not an exhaustive list:

• Eucrisa, a topical ointment for atopic dermatitis, which will be made available at an 80 percent discount for patients purchasing directly.
• Xeljanz, a widely used oral medication for types of arthritis which will be available at a 40 percent discount.
• Zavzpret, a drug used to treat migraines, which will be sold at a 50 percent discount.
• Duavee, used to treat menopause symptoms, which will be offered at around an 85 percent discount.
• Toviaz, a drug for for overactive bladder.
• Abrilada and Xeljanz, both autoimmune drugs which will be available at significant discounts.

Some of these drugs will remain very expensive even with the discounts. According to Pfizer’s website, Xeljanz, for example, costs around $6,000 per month at the standard price. A 40 percent discount brings this down to $3,600 per month.

Currently, Americans with health insurance can obtain the drug for up to $20 a month – in many cases, their insurance policy terms mean they pay nothing at all.

What else have Pfizer and Trump agreed to under this deal?

Pfizer has agreed to reduce drug prices in the US generally, putting prices in line with those paid in other developed countries, the company said.

The group has also committed to spending $70bn on domestic manufacturing facilities, which will be dedicated to “US research, development and capital projects in the next few years”.

In return, the company will be given a three-year grace period from Trump’s tariffs on branded pharmaceuticals made abroad.

“I think today we are turning the tide, and we are reversing an unfair situation,” Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla said at a news conference on Tuesday alongside Trump, referring to the difference in prices that people in the US pay for medicines compared with consumers overseas.

Will other drug companies follow suit?

Trump said on Tuesday that other pharmaceutical companies are expected to sign up for the new website, but there have been no new official announcements so far.

“It is clear that the deal that Pfizer struck is a friendly one to the industry,” said Dusetzina. “The companies that received letters requesting that they act are all likely to make agreements that I would expect to be similarly structured.

“If nothing else, these companies will want commitments that they can avoid any potential tariffs. That is worth a lot to them and to their shareholders. It will still be unclear, I think, whether the changes that they make have any tangible benefits for the average American.”

Overseas pharmaceutical companies may be able to sign up as well.

Swiss companies, including Novartis and Roche, said that they were eager to work with the Trump administration to make their drugs more affordable to US patients.

Stephan Mumenthaler, director general of scienceindustries – which represents about 250 Swiss chemical and pharmaceutical companies – told the Reuters news agency on Wednesday that he expected “mini deals” to come from Swiss and global pharmaceutical companies in the coming days.

“They are thinking in similar schemes … How can you omit the margins that middlemen are taking away so that you basically have a similar price than before, but the end consumer still gets a lower price,” he said.

Meanwhile, on Monday, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) announced the launch of its own website AmericasMedicines.com, which will enable consumers to directly buy drugs from manufacturers as well.

In a media release, Stephen J Ubl, president and CEO of PhRMA said: “We need policymakers to protect innovation, fix the broken insurance system that burdens patients with high out-of-pocket costs, and ensure foreign governments pay their fair share.”

How have markets reacted?

Pfizer’s share price rose 7 percent in the US on Tuesday and jumped 8 percent on the UK’s stock exchange on Wednesday.

The announcement of the new website also lifted the shares of European pharmaceutical companies, including Merck, Roche and AstraZeneca by about 5 percent.

Chinese Premier Li Qiang says protectionist measures, including hikes in tariffs, are a major cause of global economic stagnancy.

The announced 100% tariff on pharmaceuticals, 25% on trucks, and 30% on furniture, due to come into effect on October 1, reopen the US president’s trade war.

United States President Donald Trump has announced steep new tariffs on pharmaceutical products, big-rig trucks, and home renovation fixtures and furniture.

The announcement late on Thursday signalled the harshest trade plans from Trump since last April’s shock unveiling of reciprocal tariffs on virtually every US trading partner across the globe, marking a revival of the Republican president’s trade war.

Starting on October 1, “we will be imposing a 100% Tariff on any branded or patented Pharmaceutical Product, unless a Company IS BUILDING their Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Plant in America,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Shares of pharmaceutical companies across Asia with big exposure to the US market fell on Friday, including South Korea’s Samsung Biologics.

Trump’s move was criticised by Australia, which exported pharmaceutical products worth an estimated $1.3bn to the US in 2024, according to the United Nations Comtrade Database.

In a separate post, Trump wrote of a 25 percent tariff on “all ‘Heavy (Big) Trucks’ made in other parts of the world” to support US manufacturers such as “Peterbilt, Kenworth, Freightliner, Mack Trucks and others”.

Foreign companies that compete with these manufacturers in the US market include Sweden’s Volvo and Germany’s Daimler. Shares in both companies were sharply lower in after-hours trading in Europe.

Trump said the truck tariffs were “for many reasons, but above all else, for National Security purposes!”

Earlier this year, the Trump administration launched a so-called Section 232 probe into imports of trucks to “determine the effects of national security”, setting the stage for Thursday’s announcement.

Section 232 is a trade law provision that gives the president broad authority to impose tariffs or other restrictions on imports when they are deemed a threat to national security.

Trump also said a 50 percent tariff on home renovation materials and a 30 percent tariff on upholstered furniture would be imposed, as he claimed that such products were swamping the US market from abroad.

According to the US International Trade Commission, in 2022, imports, mainly from Asia, represented 60 percent of all furniture sold, including 86 percent of all wood furniture and 42 percent of all upholstered furniture.

Shares in home furniture retailers Wayfair and Williams Sonoma, which depend on these imported goods, tumbled in after-hours trading.

Trump’s administration has already imposed a baseline 10 percent tariff on all countries, with higher individualised rates on nations where exports to the US far exceed imports.

Trump has also used emergency powers to impose extra tariffs on trade deal partners Canada and Mexico, as well as on China, citing concerns over fentanyl trafficking and undocumented migration.

It was not yet clear how these new tariffs would factor into the existing measures.

Murdoch will be part of a group of US investors – including Trump allies – trying to take over TikTok’s US operations.

United States President Donald Trump has said media executive Lachlan Murdoch will join a group of American investors seeking to take control of TikTok’s operations in the United States.

In an interview on the Fox News programme Sunday Briefing, Trump said the proposed deal would transfer TikTok’s American assets from Chinese parent company ByteDance to US ownership. He described those involved as prominent people and “American patriots”.

“I think they’re going to do a really good job,” Trump said, adding that TikTok had helped him expand support among young voters during the 2024 election campaign.

One of the proposed investors – Larry Ellison, the co-founder of the tech firm Oracle – is a prominent Republican donor. Lachlan Murdoch’s father Rupert has backed right-wing causes and parties for decades, but has a complicated relationship with Trump, who is currently suing him.

The initiative would give Trump’s allies in corporate America influence over a platform with about 170 million US users, one of the most widely used apps shaping political and cultural debate.

Lachlan Murdoch, the chief executive of Fox Corp, recently consolidated control of his family’s media empire, which includes Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, after settling a long-running legal dispute with his siblings. Trump said the 94-year-old Rupert Murdoch may himself also be involved in the deal.

Murdoch’s media outlets attract right-leaning audiences, but they have occasionally clashed with Trump. The US president’s lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch and the Wall Street Journal is for defamation over a July report linking him to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The newspaper has defended its reporting.

Other business figures named by Trump include Dell Technologies CEO Michael Dell, who, along with Ellison, has previously been connected to discussions on TikTok’s future.

US law passed under the administration of former US President Joe Biden requires ByteDance to divest its TikTok operations, with both Democrats and Republicans supporting the legislation due to security concerns that Beijing could have access to American users’ data.

However, the spotlight on TikTok has also been linked to growing support for Palestinians and opposition to Israel among young Americans, with many pro-Israeli politicians blaming the popular app for the shifting tide.

Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio called for a ban on TikTok soon after the beginning of Israel’s war on Gaza, calling the app biased towards anti-Israel content.

Trump had proposed to ban TikTok during his first term as US president, signing two executive orders in August 2020 that were aimed at restricting the app. However, the US president did a U-turn, pledging to “save” the popular app during his 2024 re-election campaign.

The Trump administration has since tied negotiations over TikTok to wider trade talks with China.

China has consistently denied claims by US lawmakers that Beijing pressures apps like TikTok to collect personal information for the state.

United States President Donald Trump has spent the better part of this week touting a TikTok “deal” with China, but experts say it is far from finalised after both sides shared details of his phone call with President Xi Jinping.

The two leaders spoke by phone on Friday, their first call in three months, but there was no announcement of the sale of the popular social media app that has 170 million US users.

While Trump, in a post after the call on Truth Social, said “It was a very good call … appreciate the TikTok approval”, the version from Beijing was not as clear.

“On TikTok, Xi said China’s position is clear: the Chinese government respects the will of firms and welcomes companies to conduct business negotiations on the basis of market rules to reach a solution consistent with Chinese laws and regulations while balancing interests,” according to the meeting summary in Xinhua, the Reuters news agency reported.

Experts were not surprised.

“Trump is the type of person who often announces frameworks or deals to have deals or a deal that still has a lot of details to be worked out, and this seems to be another example of that,” said Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

The bigger trade deal is likely to wait till Trump and Xi meet on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum that starts on October 31 in Gyeongju in South Korea, “if that happens”, added Ziemba.

Despite the lack of any specific developments from Friday’s call, experts agree that the leaders talking is in itself a sign of a thaw, especially as Xi had previously refused to get on the phone with Trump, despite the multiple meetings in Geneva, London and most recently in Madrid.

“At least they have broken ice after a long while, and it seems like they are ready to negotiate other more difficult issues,” said Wei Liang, a professor at Middlebury Institute of International Studies, where she specialises in international trade and Chinese foreign economic policy, among other topics.

Some scholars, she said, had likened the last few months as worse than the peak of the Cold War between the US and the former Soviet Union, where leaders of the two countries at least had a hotline in place.

The call was days after Trump extended, for the fourth time, a deadline for China’s ByteDance to divest its ownership of TikTok or face a ban in the US under a law passed last year with overwhelming bipartisan support and one that was later upheld by the Supreme Court.

“It will be a very complicated transaction, if it happens,” said Robert Rogowsky, adjunct professor of trade and economic diplomacy at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, both because Beijing is reluctant to exit the app and because of the lack of clarity of future owners and rules around that.

“The value of TikTok is the algorithm which selects for us what we want to see, but in a way that is remarkably controlling,” said Rogowsky.

While the focus in debates on TikTok’s ownership has centred around data security, the real problem, instead, is its “ability to influence” viewers through the algorithm, said Rogowsky.

“Think about the power that would confer on the owners, the power of that incredibly sophisticated algorithm that drives people’s viewing, when that is under the control of a political party or groups [aligned with one], gives them tremendous power to influence.”

Middlebury’s Liang adds that it is unlikely that China would let go of the algorithm and expects “a graceful exit” that would allow both the US and China to get what they want from this deal.

China’s ‘stronger, bolder stand’

Any hammering out of a bigger trade deal on the multiple other issues, including US access to rare earth metals and China’s purchase of Russian oil and access to US semiconductor chips, will have to wait for the two leaders to meet, experts say.

“What is clear is that Trump himself is not in a space to impose new tariffs on China, and that is a reflection of the fact that the US government has mixed interests with respect to China, and the Chinese control some very important choke points,” said Ziemba, referring to China’s hold over critical minerals.

Rogowsky agrees that “China is taking a much stronger, bolder stand with regard to the US, partly because that’s the China way.”

But it is also likely that Beijing has some justification for that confidence, he said, referring to Beijing’s directive to businesses to avoid buying chips from US chip giant Nvidia.

“While US is trying to control what sort of chips go to China, they have declined to buy those, probably because they have the technology to design equally good or better and cheaper chips,” he said. Plus, with US dependence on Chinese rare earth metals, Beijing is “feeling strong enough to confront the US”.

US and Chinese presidents to discuss deal to keep popular social media app online in US, trade relations.

The White House denies any involvement with the deal despite Nvidia’s CEO meeting US President Donald Trump only a day before.

Nvidia says it will invest $5bn into Intel, throwing its heft behind the struggling US chip company, but has stopped short of giving Intel a crucial manufacturing deal.

Nvidia, which is based in Santa Clara, California, announced the investment on Thursday.

The pact, which also includes a plan for Intel and Nvidia to jointly develop personal computer and data centre chips, represents a potential risk to Taiwan’s TSMC. TSMC currently manufactures Nvidia’s flagship processors, a business that the world’s most valuable company could one day extend to Intel. AMD, which competes with Intel for supplying chips to data centres, also stands to lose because of Nvidia’s backing of Intel.

Nvidia, whose must-have chips are powering a global artificial intelligence boom, said in a statement it will pay $23.28 per share for Intel common stock, a price slightly below the $24.90 at which Intel shares closed on Wednesday.

However, that is higher than the $20.47 price per share that the United States government paid for a 10 percent stake it took in Intel last month, an extraordinary development.

The White House has denied any involvement in the deal, which comes only a day after US President Donald Trump met Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang on Wednesday.

New opening

Nvidia’s latest investment will make it one of Intel’s largest shareholders, likely owning 4 percent or more of the company after new shares are issued to complete the deal.

Nvidia’s support represents a new opening for Intel after years of turnaround efforts at the famed US manufacturer failed to pay off.

Intel – once the chip industry’s flagbearer that claimed to put the “silicon” in Silicon Valley – appointed a new CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, in March. Tan has promised to make Intel’s operation lean and build factory capacity only when there’s demand to match it.

Crucially, the deal will not involve Intel’s contract manufacturing business, known as a “foundry” in the chip industry, making chips for Nvidia. Most analysts believe that for Intel’s foundry to survive, it would need to eventually win a large customer such as Nvidia, Apple, Qualcomm or Broadcom.

But the deal adds to a growing reserve of capital that Intel has accumulated weeks after it announced a $2bn investment from Softbank and received $5.7bn from the US government.

David Zinsner, Intel’s chief financial officer, told investors at a Deutsche Bank conference last month that the company was in a “good cash position” and would not require much more capital until it saw significant demand for 14A, a next-generation manufacturing process that it expects to invest heavily in building.

Under the deal announced Thursday, Intel is planning to design custom data-centre central processors that Nvidia will package with its AI chips, known as GPUs. A proprietary Nvidia technology will let the Intel and Nvidia chips communicate at higher speeds than before.

Those speedy links are a key differentiator in the AI market because many chips must be strung together to act as one to chew through massive amounts of data.

At present, Nvidia’s best-selling AI servers with those speedy links are only available using Nvidia’s own chips, but the deal would now put Intel on equal footing, giving it a chance to make money off each Nvidia server.

On Wall Street, Nvidia’s stock is trending upwards. As of 12pm in New York (16:00 GMT), it is up more than 3.4 percent from the market open. Intel stock is surging up more than 29 percent for the day.

Ukraine has worsened fuel shortages across Russia in the past week as it has continued to hit Russia’s refineries and energy infrastructure with long-range drones while Poland has called for more oil sanctions in the wake of Russia’s first drone attack on NATO soil.

In the meantime, Russia’s creeping advance resulted in the capture of three villages over the past week, and perhaps for the first time, Ukraine’s command reacted by dismissing the retreating officers.

Russian forces took the villages of Sosnovka and Novonikolayevka in Dnipropetrovsk and Olhivske/Olgovskoye in Zaporizhia.

Ukrainian commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskii on Monday fired the two officers in charge of the 17th and 20th army corps, which are based in the two respective regions.

Since 2024, Ukraine has fought through slow, tactical retreats designed to cede limited ground for disproportionately high Russian casualties.

The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, has estimated that in May, June, July and August, Russia took 1,910sq km (737.5sq miles) of Ukrainian territory at a cost of 130,000 casualties, averaging 68 casualties per square kilometre.

Syrskyi’s dismissals could indicate a tougher approach towards land losses going forward.

Russian forces were suffering “significant losses” in Kupiansk and Dobropillia, two of the hottest points along the front, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Sunday.

Ukrainian defenders were advancing towards the Russian border in Sumy in northern Ukraine, he said.

Ukraine’s strategy – not purely defensive

Ukraine has launched a two-pronged strategy this year to choke off fuel supplies to the Russian economy and military and to kill Russian revenues from energy exports.

“The most effective sanctions – the ones that work the fastest – are the fires at Russia’s oil refineries, its terminals, oil depots,” Zelenskyy said in an evening address to the Ukrainian people on Sunday.

“Russia’s war is essentially a function of oil, of gas, of all its other energy resources,” he said.

That day, Ukraine crippled Russia’s second largest refinery when its drones struck a processing unit accounting for 40 percent of the plant’s capacity.

Russian authorities said they shot down 361 drones, suggesting there were many other targets as well.

Industry sources told the Reuters news agency that the Kirishinefteorgsintez refinery, located in the northwestern town of Kirishi, would boost production at other units. Even so, the refinery could operate only at three-quarters of its capacity.

Last year, it produced 7.1 million tonnes of diesel and 6.1 million tonnes of fuel oil for ships.

Two days after the Kirishi strike, Ukraine’s military reported it also struck the Saratov refinery, which supplies the Russian military.

There is mounting evidence that the first prong of Ukraine’s strategy is working.

Russian state newspaper Izvestiya reported last week that fuel shortages had spread to 10 Russian republics and regions, including the central regions of Ryazan, Nizhny Novgorod, Saratov and Rostov as well as occupied Crimea.

Izvestiya’s report was based on interviews with the Russian Independent Fuel Union, an association of petrol station owners, which said many petrol stations had not received deliveries for several weeks and had been forced to shut down.

Regional governors have also recently confirmed fuel shortages.

Ukraine has struck at least 10 major Russian refineries this year, and the commander of its Unmanned Systems Forces estimated Russia has lost one-fifth of its refining capacity.

“The Russian war machine will only stop when it runs out of fuel,” Zelenskyy told the annual Yalta European Strategy Meeting in Kyiv on Friday. “And Putin will begin to stop it himself when he himself truly feels that the resources for war are running out.”

Fewer exports

The second prong of Ukraine’s strategy, choking off Russia’s cashflow from oil and fuel exports, has also been highly successful.

On Friday, Ukrainian drones struck Russia’s largest oil offloading terminal at Primorsk on the Baltic Sea, according to sources at Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU).

The strike caused a fire at the pumping station and a ship moored next to it, forcing the terminal to suspend shipments, Ukrainian outlet Suspilne reported.

Ukraine also struck pumping stations along the Transneft Baltic Pipeline System-2, which supplies crude oil to offloading terminals in the port of Ust-Luga, also in the Leningrad region.

“Oil and gas revenues have accounted for between a third and half of Russia’s total federal budget proceeds over the past decade, making the sector the single most important source of financing for the government,” Reuters said.

Russia has banned all exports of refined petroleum products since February and sought to increase exports of crude oil instead.

But even that goal may not be possible.

Russia’s biggest pipeline operator, Transneft, has reportedly told upstream oil producers they may have to cut their output because Ukrainian strikes have degraded its ability to store and carry oil to refineries and export terminals, according to three industry sources who spoke to Reuters.

Transneft dismissed the report as “fake news”.

EU seeks to end all imports

Poland called for a complete ban of Russian oil imports to the European Union after 19 Russian drones entered its airspace on September 10.

Most of the EU has banned Russian oil imports, but Hungary and Slovakia have an exemption until the end of 2027 because they said it’s cheaper for them to import oil via pipeline from Russia than to receive it through other EU countries.

That may change, the European Commission chief said on Tuesday. “The Commission will soon present its 19th package of sanctions, targeting crypto, banks, and energy,” President Ursula von der Leyen wrote on social media. “The Commission will propose speeding up the phase-out of Russian fossil imports.”

Ongoing sales of Russian energy to Europe have been a topic of concern.

Official EU imports of Russian oil have dropped by an estimated 90 percent since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, according to estimates from the EU’s statistical service.

However, the EU never actually banned Russian gas, and the London-based think tank Ember has estimated it paid Russia $23.6bn for gas last year – almost $5bn more than it paid in military aid to Ukraine.

“I urge all partners to stop looking for excuses not to impose particular sanctions,” Zelenskyy said on Saturday. “If [Russian President Vladimir] Putin does not want peace, he must be forced into it.”

BREAKINGBREAKING,

The central bank’s cut comes amid a cooling labour market, which has stalled economic growth.

The United States Federal Reserve will cut interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point, so they will now be between 4.00 percent and 4.25 percent, as a slowing labour market stalls economic growth.

The Fed, the US central bank, announced its decision on Wednesday afternoon.

Economists had widely expected a 25 basis point cut, with CME FedWatch — a group that tracks probability of monetary policy decisions — putting the odds at 96 percent. One basis point is one-hundredth of one percentage point.

Before Wednesday, the Fed had last cut rates in December by 25 basis points, the third cut last year, taking its benchmark rate to between 4.25 percent and 4.50 percent, where it had held steady since.

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell has emphasised that uncertainty in the economy has kept the Fed cautious, arguing that maintaining rates gave policymakers flexibility as conditions shifted.

The cut comes as a response to shifting economic conditions, following a slew of weak jobs reports showing a slowdown in growth in the labour market and a slight uptick in inflationary pressures.

“Recent indicators suggest that growth of economic activity moderated in the first half of the year. Job gains have slowed, and the unemployment rate has edged up but remains low. Inflation has moved up and remains somewhat elevated,” the central bank said in a press release.

“Uncertainty about the economic outlook remains elevated. The Committee is attentive to the risks to both sides of its dual mandate and judges that downside risks to employment have risen.”

Investors are also waiting for indications from the central bank on whether it will cut interest rates two or three times for the rest of the year as economic uncertainty weighs on the US labour market and the broader economy while the costs of goods and services increase under tariff-driven pressures.

Political pressure

The latest cut comes at a time of heightened scrutiny and pressure on the Fed, which has long emphasised its independence from political pressure. But for months, US President Donald Trump has publicly attacked the central bank, mocking Powell as “too late Powell” over his cautious approach to cutting rates.

At the same time, the Republican-led White House has sought to oust Fed Governor Lisa Cook, who was appointed by former US President Joe Biden, a Democrat, citing alleged mortgage fraud.

On Monday, a US appeals court blocked Trump from removing her. The administration has said it will challenge the ruling.

“The president lawfully removed Lisa Cook for cause. The administration will appeal this decision and looks forward to ultimate victory on the issue,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said on Tuesday.

That same day, Stephen Miran, chair of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisors, was sworn in to fill a temporary Fed seat left vacant by Adriana Kugler until January, while the White House searches for a permanent replacement.

Miran pledged to act independently, but his close ties to the Trump administration — and his work as a fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute — have raised doubts. His Senate confirmation fell largely along party lines, 47–48, and Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to oppose him.

On Monday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called Miran “nothing more than Donald Trump’s mouthpiece at the Fed”.

Markets respond

As of 2pm in New York (18:00 GMT), US markets are trending upwards. The Nasdaq is about even with the market open, the S&P 500 is up 0.2, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up by 1 percent.