restore

Published on
05/05/2026 – 19:06 GMT+2

EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič on Tuesday urged the US to honour its side of the EU-US trade deal during a meeting in Paris with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Tensions have escalated in recent days over the implementation of the EU-US trade deal reached almost a year ago in Turnberry, Scotland, after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose 25% tariffs on EU cars, in breach of the agreement capping US tariffs on EU goods at 15%.

The agreement was further shaken in February after the White House introduced new tariffs following a US Supreme Court ruling declaring the 2025 tariffs illegal.

A European Commission spokesperson said Tuesday that during the 90-minute meeting with Greer, Šefčovič called for a “swift return” to the agreed Turnberry terms, meaning “a 15% all-inclusive tariff rate.”

The US currently imposes a 10% tariff on EU goods on top of duties already in place before Trump’s return to the White House in 2025, with rates varying across EU products. Combined duties can now reach as much as 30% on certain EU exports, such as cheese, exceeding the 15% cap established in the EU–US agreement.

During the meeting, Šefčovič also updated his counterpart on the EU’s implementation of the agreement, the spokesperson said, “to clarify” where the EU “stands.”

Washington wants Brussels to accelerate the EU legislative process needed to implement the deal, including the bloc’s commitment to cut tariffs on US industrial goods to zero.

But negotiations between EU governments and members of the European Parliament remain tense.

MEPs want to add safeguards that would make EU tariff cuts conditional on the US implementing its side of the agreement. They are also pushing for a “sunset clause” that would terminate the deal in March 2028 unless renewed.

The European Parliament’s position is backed by France, while Germany and other member states want to preserve the original agreement struck in July 2025 by Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

A round of negotiation is scheduled for Wednesday evening.

WASHINGTON — Two and a half centuries after the American colonies declared independence from Britain under King George III, his descendant King Charles III lands in Washington on Monday with trans-Atlantic ties under strain and security in the spotlight.

A shooting at a Washington dinner attended by President Trump on Saturday sparked a last-minute security review of the four-day state visit, intended to celebrate the United States’ 250th anniversary, and the U.S.-U.K. “special relationship.”

Buckingham Palace said the king “is greatly relieved to hear that the president, first lady and all guests have been unharmed.” After a security review, the palace said the trip “will proceed as planned.”

Trump praises the king but derides Starmer

A rift between the U.K. government and Trump over issues including the Iran war had already raised the political stakes for the British monarch’s visit.

In recent weeks, Trump has lambasted Prime Minister Keir Starmer over his unwillingness to join U.S. military attacks on Iran, dismissing Britain’s leader as “not Winston Churchill,” the World War II prime minister who coined the phrase “special relationship” for the U.K.-U.S. bond.

It’s part of a wider rift between Trump and the United States’ NATO allies, whom he has called “cowards” and “useless” for not joining action against Iran. A leaked Pentagon email suggested the U.S. could reassess support for the U.K.’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands in the south Atlantic. Britain and Argentina fought a 1982 war over the islands, also known as the Islas Malvinas.

The president insists the political chill won’t affect the royal visit. Charles “has nothing to do with that,” Trump said in March, meaning NATO.

The president has spoken in glowing terms about Charles, repeatedly referring to the monarch as his “friend” and a “great guy.”

He also continues to mention his “amazing” trip to the U.K. in September with first lady Melania Trump for an unprecedented second state visit. Starmer hand-delivered the invitation from the king in the Oval Office five weeks after Trump returned to office, in a very public attempt to woo the Republican president.

The U.K. royal family laid on pomp and pageantry for the Trumps, with scarlet-clad guardsmen, brass bands and a sumptuous banquet at Windsor Castle.

“President Trump has always had great respect for King Charles, and their relationship was further strengthened by the president’s historic visit to the United Kingdom last year,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told The Associated Press. “The president looks forward to a special visit by Their Majesties, which will include a beautiful state dinner and multiple events throughout the week.”

Trump, meanwhile, told the BBC that the king’s visit could “absolutely” help repair the trans-Atlantic relationship.

“He’s fantastic. He’s a fantastic man. Absolutely the answer is yes,” the president said.

Some have called for the trip to be canceled

Kristofer Allerfeldt, a University of Exeter professor specializing in American history, said the two governments have very different objectives for the trip.

He said that for Charles, the trip is about “reinforcing long-term ties, showcasing the monarchy’s soft power and reminding the world that Britain still carries diplomatic weight.”

For Trump, it’s more about “a media event,” with emphasis on the optics of a visit that resembles a meeting of “two gilded monarchs.”

Some U.K. politicians worry that the trip is fraught with opportunities for embarrassment. Trump’s recent broadsides at Pope Leo XIV have heightened those concerns.

Ed Davey, leader of the U.K. centrist opposition Liberal Democrats party, earlier this month called Trump “a dangerous and corrupt gangster” and implored the government to cancel the trip.

“I really fear for what Trump might say or do while our king is forced to stand by his side,” Davey said in the House of Commons. “We cannot put His Majesty in that position.”

Starmer defended the visit, saying “the monarchy, through the bonds that it builds, is often able to reach through the decades” and bolster important relationships.

Andrew and Epstein cast a shadow

Raising the stakes is the shadow of the king’s younger brother Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who has been stripped of his royal title of Prince Andrew, exiled from public life and put under police investigation over his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. He has denied committing any crimes.

Epstein victims have urged the king to meet with them and other sexual abuse survivors. It’s unlikely he will do so.

Charles has visited the U.S. 19 times, but this is his first state visit to the country since becoming king in 2022. His mother, Queen Elizabeth II, made four state visits to the U.S.

The king, who is 77 and was diagnosed in early 2024 with an undisclosed form of cancer, will spend four days in the U.S. accompanied by Queen Camilla.

In Washington, the king and queen will have a private tea with the Trumps and attend a garden party and a formal White House state dinner. The president and the king will also have a one-on-one meeting.

The royal couple will also visit the Sept. 11 memorial in New York and attend a 250th birthday block party in Virginia, where Charles will also meet Indigenous leaders involved in nature conservation — a favorite cause of the environmentalist king.

Three centuries after Britain’s kings and queens gave up any real political power, the royals remain symbols of soft power, deployed by elected governments to smooth international relationships and send messages about what the U.K. considers important.

A key moment will be the king’s speech to the U.S. Congress on Tuesday. It’s only the second time, after Queen Elizabeth II in 1991, that a U.K. monarch has addressed a joint meeting of both houses.

Elizabeth praised liberalism on that trip, spoke against the idea that “power grows from the barrel of a gun” and praised the “rich ethnic and cultural diversity of both our societies.”

The king’s treasured causes, including the environment and harmony among religious faiths, are in contrast to Trump’s. He’s unlikely to accentuate differences, but Allerfeldt said that, in the monarch’s subtle way, the king could use his speech to send a message.

“He does have an unorthodox way of looking at the world, and I think maybe he can actually have something valid to say when he addresses Congress,” Allerfeldt said.

Superville and Lawless write for the Associated Press. Jill Lawless reported from London.

April 10 (UPI) — A federal judge has again ordered the Pentagon to restore access to credentialed journalists, ruling the Trump administration was attempting to flout his previous order by disguising it as an interim rule.

“The Department cannot simply reinstate an unlawful policy under the guise of taking ‘new’ action and expect the court to look the other way,” U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman said in his Thursday ruling, obtained by Courthouse News.

The Department of Defense has said it intends to appeal.

The ruling comes in a case filed by The New York Times challenging a policy instituted by the Department of Defense in October requiring all journalists with access to the Pentagon to sign a form acknowledging they could have their credentials revoked for collecting unauthorized information.

Most Pentagon reporters declined and surrendered their credentials.

Last month, Friedman ruled the policy was unconstitutional and ordered the Pentagon to reinstate the credentials of seven journalists with The Times.

As the Defense Department said it planned to appeal the ruling, it unveiled a new revised policy that moved their office space outside the Pentagon building and required credentialed journalists to be escorted by Defense personnel at all times within it.

The Times again challenged the new, revised rule, accusing it of being a Trump administration attempt to defy Friedman’s order.

Friedman on Thursday agreed, finding that instead of returning the credentials to the Times’ journalists and restoring their access to the Pentagon, the Trump administration instead cut off access to all journalists.

“The court cannot conclude this opinion without noting once again what this case is really about: the attempt by the secretary of defense to dictate the information received by the American people, to control the message so that the public hears and sees only what the secretary and the Trump administration want them to hear and see,” Friedman, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, wrote in the 20-page ruling.

“The Constitution demands better. The American public demands better, too.”

After the court rejected the Pentagon’s attempt to restrict the First Amendment freedoms of The Times’ reporters, it invoked a new policy with only slightly different language from the one that was struck down in order to achieve the same unconstitutional end, he said.

“The curtailment of First Amendment rights is dangerous at any time, and even more so in a time of war,” Friedman said. “Suppression of political speech is the mark of an autocracy, not a democracy — as the framers recognized when they drafted the First Amendment.”

Charlie Stadtlander, a spokesperson for The Times, cheered Thursday’s ruling, saying it upholds the paper’s constitutional rights while sending a clear message to the Pentagon.

“Compliance with a lawful order of a court is not optional; it is required in a democracy committed to the rule of law,” Stadtlander said in a statement.

“We are pleased that Judge Friedman saw the revised policy issued by the Pentagon after his last decision for what it was: a poorly disguised attempt to continue to violate the constitutional rights of The Times and its journalists.”

In announcing the Pentagon’s intention to appeal, Sean Parnell, assistant to the secretary of defense for public affairs, argued that they have at all times complied with the court’s original order, saying the revised policy addressed all concerns raised in Friedman’s March 20 opinion.

“The department remains committed to press access at the Pentagon while fulfilling its statutory obligation to ensure the safe and secure operation of the Pentagon Reservation,” he said in a statement.

The Trump administration has been repeatedly accused by critics of taking actions aimed at influencing media coverage, from the October memorandum concerning Pentagon reporters to restricting access to outlets over editorial decisions and seizing control of the White House press pool.