trade

Pope Leo has called on global leaders to reduce international tensions and turn away from violence, delivering an emotional appeal during a visit to Pompei, Italy, on Friday. His remarks came just one day after he met U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the Vatican, where both sides discussed efforts to improve strained relations between Washington and the Holy See.

The meeting took place against a politically sensitive backdrop, with U.S. President Donald Trump having recently criticized the Pope over his comments on the Iran conflict. Pope Leo, the first U.S.-born pontiff and former Cardinal Robert Prevost, has increasingly spoken out on global conflicts in recent weeks after initially maintaining a relatively low public profile following his election in May 2025.

Speaking to worshippers in Pompei, the Pope urged prayers that world leaders would be inspired to “calm rancour and fratricidal hatreds” and to take responsibility for reducing global violence. He also warned against becoming desensitized to images of war, and criticized what he described as an international system that often prioritizes the arms trade over human life.

Why It Matters

The Pope’s intervention highlights the growing moral and diplomatic role of the Vatican at a time of heightened global instability, particularly amid ongoing tensions involving Iran, the United States, and wider geopolitical rivalries. His criticism of the global arms economy directly challenges dominant security-driven foreign policy approaches, especially in Western capitals.

As the spiritual leader of more than 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide, Pope Leo’s statements carry significant symbolic and diplomatic weight. His increasingly vocal stance on war and governance also places him in a rare position of open tension with major political actors, including the U.S. administration.

What’s Next

The Vatican is expected to continue engaging diplomatically with U.S. officials despite emerging tensions, particularly following the Rubio meeting. Pope Leo is likely to maintain his public messaging on peace, conflict prevention, and criticism of the global arms trade, reinforcing the Holy See’s traditional role as a moral voice in international affairs. At the same time, reactions from Washington and other governments may further shape the evolving tone of Vatican–state relations in the coming months.

With information from Reuters.

Warring sides accuse each other of violations as attacks continue across front lines.

Russia and Ukraine have accused each other of breaching a short ceasefire announced by Moscow to coincide with Victory Day commemorations marking the Soviet Union’s defeat of Nazi Germany.

The Kremlin said its forces downed 264 Ukrainian drones early on Friday, with officials in Moscow reporting attempted attacks on the capital and in the Perm region in the Ural Mountains.

The truce, declared from May 8 to May 10, was intended to cover annual celebrations that include a military parade in Moscow.

Russia had warned that any disruption would trigger a large-scale missile response against Kyiv, urging foreign diplomats to leave the Ukrainian capital before potential escalation.

In a separate announcement, the Russian transport ministry said on Friday that 13 airports in Russia’s south halted operations due to drone attacks.

“Operations at the regional centre in Rostov-on-Don, which manages air traffic in southern Russia, have been temporarily suspended after Ukrainian drone struck the administrative building of the ‘Southern Russia Air Navigation’ branch,” the ministry said.

There were no casualties, it added.

Victory Day commemorations mark the Soviet Union’s loss of 27 million people in World War II, as it drove Nazi forces back to Berlin, where Adolf Hitler died, and the Red Army’s Soviet Victory Banner was raised over the Reichstag in May 1945.

‘We will defend our people’s lives’

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russian forces continued to attack positions overnight, dismissing the ceasefire as ineffective.

He said Russia had carried out more than 140 attacks on front-line positions by early morning, alongside 10 assaults and more than 850 drone attacks.

“As we did over the past 24 hours, Ukraine will respond in kind today as well. We will defend our positions and people’s lives,” Zelenskyy said.

Ukraine also reported striking a Russian oil facility in Yaroslavl, deep inside Russian territory, in what Kyiv described as retaliation for attacks on its cities.

“Ukraine’s long-range sanctions continued in response to Russian strikes on our cities and villages,” Zelenskyy said.

Kyiv had proposed an open-ended ceasefire beginning on May 6, which it said Russia ignored. Moscow did not adopt that proposal, and neither side accepted the other’s terms.

In remarks before the truce, Zelenskyy criticised Russia’s approach to the commemorations, saying Moscow sought a pause “to hold their parade, to go out onto the square safely for an hour once a year, and then continue killing, killing our people and waging war”.

“The Russians are already talking about strikes after May 9. Strange and certainly inappropriate of the Russian leadership,” he added.

“Just as 81 years ago, so now America can help peace with a just and strong stance against the aggressor,” Zelenskyy said. “And it is important that the American people now view Russia precisely in this way – as an aggressor.”

Brent crude rises amid clashes in critical waterway.

Oil prices have jumped after clashes between United States and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz pushed their tenuous ceasefire to the brink.

Futures for Brent crude rose as much as 7.5 percent during a volatile trading session on Thursday, before easing as Asia’s markets opened on Friday morning.

The international benchmark stood at $101.12 per barrel as of 03:00 GMT, down from the day’s high of $103.70.

The latest rise came after the US and Iran exchanged fire in the critical strait, a conduit for about one-fifth of global oil and natural gas supplies, despite the truce announced between the sides on April 7.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) said it launched strikes on Iran after three US Navy guided-missile destroyers came under attack from Iranian missiles, drones and small boats in the strait.

Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters earlier accused the US of violating the ceasefire by attacking an Iranian oil tanker and another vessel in the vicinity of the waterway.

The Iranian military headquarters also accused the US of targeting civilian areas, including Qeshm Island.

US President Donald Trump on Thursday appeared to downplay the clashes, saying the ceasefire remained in effect, while Iran’s state-run Press TV said the situation had gone “back to normal”.

Shipping in the strait has been at a near standstill since late February amid the threat of Iranian attacks on the massive oil tankers that usually transport much of the world’s energy supplies.

Brent prices are up about 40 percent compared with before the war amid an estimated shortfall in daily production of 14.5 million barrels.

Asian stock markets opened lower on Friday amid the heightened tensions, with Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225, South Korea’s KOSPI and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index each falling more than 1 percent.

On Wall Street, the benchmark S&P 500 fell about 0.4 percent overnight after hitting an all-time high the previous day.

NEW YORK — President Trump’s 10% global tariffs were declared unlawful by a federal trade court in a fresh blow to the administration’s economic agenda, several months after the U.S. Supreme Court vacated earlier levies he’d imposed.

A divided three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of International Trade in Manhattan on Thursday granted a request by a group of small businesses and two dozen mostly Democrat-led states to vacate the tariffs. Trump imposed the 10% duties in February under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which had never previously been invoked.

The court for now only immediately blocked the administration from enforcing the tariffs against the two companies that sued and Washington state, making clear that it was not issuing a so-called universal injunction. The panel found that the other states that sued lacked standing because they aren’t direct importers, instead arguing that they were harmed by having to pay higher prices for goods when businesses passed on tariff costs.

It wasn’t immediately clear what the ruling would mean for now for other importers that had been paying the contested levies.

The majority of the panel rejected the administration’s stance that “balance-of-payments deficits” — a key criterion for imposing the Section 122 tariffs — was “a malleable phrase.” They concluded that Trump’s proclamation imposing the levies failed to identify that such deficits existed within the meaning of the 1974 law, instead using “trade and current account deficits to stand in the place.”

The decision is the latest setback for the president’s effort to levy tariffs without input from Congress. Earlier duties — overturned by the Supreme Court on Feb. 20 — were issued under a different law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. In that case, the justices ruled Trump had exceeded his authority, kicking off a legal scramble by importers for almost $170 billion in refunds.

The U.S. Justice Department could challenge the trade court’s latest ruling by taking the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which ruled against the Trump administration during the last tariff fight.

Section 122 allows presidents to impose duties in situations where the U.S. faces what the law defines as “fundamental international payments problems.” Even before Trump issued the tariffs, economists and policy experts debated whether the president would be able to build a solid legal framework using the statute.

In a proclamation declaring the use of Section 122, Trump said that tariffs were justified because the U.S. runs a “large and serious” trade deficit. He also pointed to the negative net flows of income from investments Americans have overseas and other things that showed the U.S. balance-of-payments relationship with the rest of the world was deteriorating.

Under the law, presidents have the ability to impose tariffs on goods imported into the U.S. on a short-term basis to address concerns about how money is flowing in and out of the country. Those concerns include “large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits” and an “imminent and significant depreciation of the dollar.”

Unlike other legal options Trump might pursue to impose tariffs, Section 122 can be invoked without waiting for a federal agency to conduct an investigation to determine whether the levies are justifiable. But they can still be challenged in court.

The small businesses and states that sued argued that Section 122 became outdated when the U.S. ditched the gold standard decades ago. They say Trump improperly conflated “balance-of-payments deficits” with U.S. trade deficits in order to justify using the law.

They also allege that Trump’s order announcing the Section 122 tariffs was “riddled with omissions and mischaracterizations” around the meaning of a balance-of-payments deficit. The trade deficit cited by Trump is just one part of calculating the country’s balance of payments position, the states say.

Under Section 122, the president can order import duties of as much as 15%. The executive action can last 150 days, at which point Congress would have to extend it. Trump has said he would aim to increase the rate to 15% from 10%.

The states argue that Trump’s new tariffs violate other requirements in Section 122, including that such duties not be discriminatory in their application. The states argue that Trump’s new tariffs improperly exempt some goods from Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua.

According to the complaint, the Trump administration conceded during the previous litigation over his IEEPA tariffs that trade deficits “are conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.”

The clash over Section 122 emerged just as the legal fight over refunds from Trump’s IEEPA tariffs began to heat up. A different judge in the Court of International Trade, U.S. Judge Richard Eaton, is overseeing the massive refund effort and ordered Customs and Border Protection to give him regular updates on a largely automated process the government will use to issue most refunds.

Larson and Tillman write for Bloomberg.

May 7 (UPI) — As Washington and Hanoi enter a dense stretch of trade diplomacy, the coming weeks will test whether one of the Indo-Pacific’s most pragmatic economic partnerships can sustain its momentum or become entangled in the very frictions it has worked to avoid.

A series of meetings — including Section 301 hearings on industrial capacity from Tuesday to Friday this week, forced labor discussions April 28 to May 1 and bilateral consultations next Monday and Tuesday, arrives at a pivotal juncture.

They will help determine whether the United States and Vietnam can preserve a trade relationship that has become central to supply chain resilience, U.S. business interests and Vietnam’s continued economic ascent.

At its core, the U.S.-Vietnam Comprehensive Strategic Partnership is grounded not in diplomacy alone, but also in economic logic.

Partnership built on complementarity

Over the past decade, Vietnam has emerged as one of the fastest-growing U.S. trading partners, driven by a convergence of structural interests. As American firms diversify production beyond China, Vietnam has become a preferred destination, offering cost competitiveness, political stability and deepening integration into global value chains.

U.S. data show Vietnam ran a $123.5 billion trade surplus with the United States last year — the fourth-largest imbalance after China, the European Union and Mexico. It is a figure that has drawn increasing scrutiny in Washington even as it reflects the depth of bilateral trade integration.

From electronics to apparel and consumer goods, Vietnam-based production is often embedded within supply chains designed and financed by U.S. and allied firms. American companies benefit from lower production costs and diversified risk, while Vietnamese exports sustain growth and employment at home.

Disrupting this ecosystem through blunt trade measures risks undermining the very businesses Washington seeks to protect.

Hanoi has consistently signaled a willingness to engage. It has approached trade tensions not with confrontation, but with negotiation — a posture that stands in contrast to more adversarial economic relationships. The upcoming consultations should reinforce that cooperative trajectory, not derail it.

Rethinking “overcapacity”

The debate over “overcapacity” has become a central issue in U.S. trade discussions, with concerns that the term is being applied broadly across different economic models.

In Vietnam’s case, officials and industry observers note that production growth is largely driven by market-based investment and global supply chain shifts rather than state-directed industrial surpluses.

“Vietnam’s overcapacity is much different from China’s,” said Murray Hiebert, head of research for Bower Group Asia. “China’s factories are producing huge surpluses that it dumps onto the world’s markets below market prices. Instead, Vietnam relies on foreign investment companies to produce for export.”

He noted that Vietnam’s export engine is overwhelmingly foreign-driven, with multinational firms, particularly from the United States and South Korea, accounting for roughly 80% of outbound shipments, while domestic producers contribute only about one-fifth.

“Vietnam’s economy is largely a manufacturing platform for foreign companies,” Hiebert said. “U.S. policymakers need to understand Vietnam did not create overcapacity by subsidizing manufacturing, but by courting foreign investors who used Vietnam as a low-cost base to serve global markets.”

Vietnam’s manufacturing expansion has been shaped by global supply chain realignment, accelerated by U.S.-China trade tensions and pandemic-era disruptions, rather than by state-led efforts to flood international markets. Many of the factories operating in Vietnam were relocated or expanded by multinational firms seeking to maintain access to U.S. consumers.

To conflate this model with subsidy-driven overproduction risks misdiagnosing the issue and penalizing a partner that has facilitated, rather than distorted, market outcomes.

Labor reforms and supply chain progress

Concerns over labor practices and supply chain integrity remain part of the policy conversation, particularly in the context of ongoing forced labor discussions. But these concerns should be weighed against Vietnam’s steady, if incremental, progress.

In recent years, Hanoi has undertaken significant labor reforms aligned with the International Labor Organization, including updates to its labor code, expanded worker representation rights and enhanced compliance mechanisms.

Vietnam has also prioritized traceability and transparency across key export sectors. From fisheries to manufacturing, authorities have invested in monitoring systems, strengthened inspections and improved regulatory oversight — steps aimed at meeting the expectations of international partners and markets.

This is an evolving process, not a completed one. But the trajectory is clear: Vietnam is moving toward higher standards, not retreating from them.

The case for market economy recognition

Another unresolved issue, Vietnam’s designation as a non-market economy under U.S. trade law, has become increasingly difficult to justify.

Vietnam operates within the framework of the World Trade Organization and has been recognized as a market economy by more than 70 countries. Its private sector has expanded rapidly, its regulatory environment continues to evolve and its integration into global markets is deepening.

Maintaining Vietnam’s current non-market economy designation under U.S. trade law has raised concerns among policymakers and business groups, who say it could affect the application of trade remedies and investor confidence. The issue comes as Washington seeks to expand economic partnerships across the Indo-Pacific.

Avoiding unintended consequences

Intellectual property has emerged as a new point of tension in U.S.-Vietnam trade relations. Ambassador Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative, has designated Vietnam as a “Priority Foreign Country” — its most serious classification — in its latest intellectual property rights report, opening the door to a potential Section 301 investigation within 30 days.

The designation, the first of its kind in more than a decade, reflects ongoing U.S. concerns over Vietnam’s intellectual property protections and could affect the trajectory of current trade negotiations.

Sweeping trade measures designed to address structural concerns could disrupt supply chains, raise costs for American businesses and consumers, and weaken a partnership that has delivered measurable benefits. In an already fragile global economy, such outcomes would be counterproductive.

Vietnam’s own incentives align with stability. Its growth depends on open markets, foreign investment and compliance with international standards. That alignment should be viewed as a strategic asset.

Washington should avoid applying a China-centric lens to Vietnam’s trade profile, said Dan Harris, a partner at the law firm Harris Sliwoski. Treating Vietnam as an “overcapacity” case without clear evidence risks penalizing U.S. firms that relocated production there in line with Washington’s own push to reduce reliance on China and strengthen supply chain resilience.

“We will end up punishing the companies that did what we asked,” Harris warned.

He added that the broader strategic context matters: Vietnam’s long history of conflict and mistrust with China sets it apart from Beijing, even as it emerges as an increasingly important U.S. partner in the Indo-Pacific.

But the implications of Washington’s trade posture toward Hanoi extend far beyond economics. Vietnam’s export-driven growth, fueled primarily by multinational investment rather than state subsidies, has quietly elevated the country into a strategic linchpin in the Indo-Pacific.

A stable and prosperous Vietnam not only supports supply chain diversification, but also reinforces the rules-based order in the South China Sea.

Economic resilience in Vietnam is not peripheral to U.S. strategy. It is foundational to maintaining balance in contested Indo-Pacific waters. Trade policy cannot be divorced from strategic reality: A weakened Vietnamese economy would do more than disrupt production flows. It could undercut one of the region’s most important counterweights to China’s expanding maritime presence.

Balancing trade and security alignments

Rising risks of policy missteps could carry strategic costs. Analysts warn that overly punitive U.S. trade measures, particularly those misreading Vietnam’s market-driven model, may push Hanoi toward alternative economic alignments, reshaping regional supply chains and weakening U.S. influence in an increasingly competitive Indo-Pacific.

U.S. policymakers are weighing more targeted, cooperative measures in managing trade concerns with Vietnam, including a bilateral supply chain monitoring mechanism, expanded data-sharing on industrial capacity and the potential creation of a standing U.S.-Vietnam trade and standards working group.

The approach aims to address regulatory and transparency issues while maintaining stability in the broader economic partnership.

The challenge for Washington is alignment – translating economic logic into strategic necessity. That means recognizing Vietnam not as a trade problem to be managed, but rather as a partner whose economic trajectory is increasingly central to the region’s stability and security.

Beyond trade flows and investment figures, the U.S.-Vietnam economic relationship carries broader strategic significance. It reinforces a rules-based framework in the Indo-Pacific and supports cooperation across sectors ranging from technology to maritime security.

Any escalation in trade tensions between the United States and Vietnam could disrupt commercial ties and place broader strategic cooperation at risk, as both sides seek to sustain recent gains in economic and security engagement.

James Borton is a non-resident senior fellow at Johns Hopkins SAIS Foreign Policy Institute and the author of Harvesting the Waves: How Blue Parks Shape Policy, Politics, and Peacebuilding in the South China Sea. Borton is the editor-in-chief of the South China Sea NewsWire. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

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.

Published on
04/05/2026 – 14:17 GMT+2

The EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is scheduled to meet his US counterpart Jamieson Greer on Tuesday amid rising tensions between the bloc and the US following President Donald Trump’s announcement of a potential 25% tariff on EU automobiles.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The discussions, scheduled ahead of a G7 trade ministers’ meeting in Paris, were planned before President Trump’s latest tariff threat, Euronews has learned.

But they now give both sides an opportunity to ease tensions after Trump signalled measures that would breach the EU-US trade deal agreed last summer in Turnberry, Scotland, between Trump and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, which caps US tariffs on EU goods at 15%.

On Monday, the Commission sought to project a sense of calm.

“It’s not the first time we have seen threats,” Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said, adding: “We remain very calm, focused on enforcing the joint statement in the interests of our companies, of our citizens.”

Trump’s threat came after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz criticised the US approach to the war in Iran, and after Washington announced the withdrawal of 5,000 US troops from Germany, further straining transatlantic relations.

German MEP Bernd Lange (S&D), chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee, told Euronews on Monday that Trump’s threats were aimed specifically at German car manufacturers.

“All options remain open”

The US president also accused the EU of moving too slowly to implement the agreement.

“Since day one we are implementing the Joint Statement [the EU-US deal] and we are fully committed to delivering on our shared commitments,” Regnier said, adding that the EU was seeking predictability in the EU-US trade relation.

The Turnberry deal is currently being negotiated between EU governments and lawmakers before it can enter into force on the EU side. Co-legislators must still agree on the modalities for cutting EU tariffs on US goods to zero, as outlined in the agreement.

MEPs have nonetheless introduced safeguards to ensure the EU is not the only party adhering to its commitments and to protect the bloc from future US threats.

The Commission reiterated Monday that if the US takes measures that are “inconsistent” with the trade deal, all “options” remain open.

Last year, during the trade dispute that followed Trump’s return to power, the EU executive prepared a package targeting €95 billion worth of US products, though the measures were later suspended.

At the time, several EU countries also urged the use of the bloc’s anti-coercion instrument, which enables the EU to respond to economic pressure from third countries with a wide range of trade defence tools, including restrictions on licences and intellectual property rights.

In an interview with Euronews, EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič issued a firm warning that the European Union will not hesitate to defend its industries after Beijing signaled possible retaliation over new EU plans to bolster its industrial base.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

China this week up the pressure on Brussels, threatening countermeasures unless the EU softens core elements of its “Made in Europe” proposal—designed to tighten market access for foreign companies—and its Cybersecurity Act, which could ultimately restrict Chinese telecom firms’ presence across the bloc.

Asked about China’s reaction to what the EU describes as much-needed measures to reinforce its sovereignty and restore a level playing field, Šefčovič told Euronews the EU will “always” defend the interests of its companies.

“We will fight tooth and nail for every European job, for every European company, for every open sector, if we see they are treated unfairly,” said Šefčovič in comments to Euronews in an exclusive interview Friday.

Ballooning trade deficit in detriment to EU

Relations between Brussels and Beijing have deteriorated sharply over the past year, with China tightening export controls on rare earths vital to Europe’s clean-tech and defence industries, as well as restricting chips essential to the automotive sector, intensifying pressure on already fragile supply chains across the bloc.

In response, the EU has pushed for legislative proposals in the domain of cybersecurity and single market rules for companies, prompting a sharp reaction from China which has accused the EU of unfair practices. Earlier this week, Beijing said the EU should not underestimate China’s “firm resolve” to safeguard its interests.

Šefčovič rejected the suggestion that recent developments signal a looming trade war but stressed that the EU does not operate under pressure and expects to be treated with respect. “We never threaten our partners, and we certainly don’t do it through the media,” he said. “What we need is strategic patience and a great deal of courage.”

He said a “war” is often easy to start, but difficult to exit. A Chinese official told Euronews Beijing does not wish for a trade spat to escalate, but said China is serious about what it considers discriminatory practices. The EU disputes discrimination.

The EU’s trade chief pointed to a ballooning trade deficit between the two sides as a cause for concern. The bloc’s trade gap with China surged to €359.3 billion in 2025, a level Šefčovič called “simply unsustainable” that does not show signs of improvement.

He also said policymakers, the European parliament and economic actors in the EU have delivered “a very strong economic and political reaction” to tackle the trade deficit.

So far, Brussels has failed to secure meaningful commitments from Beijing to rebalance trade relations. At the same time, EU officials are growing increasingly concerned that Chinese exports—shut out of the US market by higher tariffs—are being redirected towards Europe. Brussels also points to China’s overcapacity as a source of concern.

The EU is now pressing Beijing to enter serious negotiations and deliver concrete results.

“I invited the Chinese foreign minister to visit Brussels because I think we need a very thorough assessment of the current situation,” Šefčovič told Euronews. “What I want is constructive engagement.”

Faced with a surge in low-cost Chinese imports, the EU is relying on trade defence instruments to counter what it sees as dumped and heavily subsidised goods, while also monitoring efforts by Chinese firms to bypass restrictions by shifting production outside China. Šefčovič made clear the EU will not be pushed into retreat from those issues.

“There are very strong industrial policies in China. You have the same in the US, in Canada, in Japan and in Korea. So, nobody should be surprised if the European Union responds in kind—especially when it comes to public money and public funds.”

Islamabad, Pakistan – Pakistan has opened six overland transit routes for goods destined for Iran, formalising a road corridor through its territory as thousands of containers remain stranded at Karachi port because of the United States blockade of Iranian ports and ships trying to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.

The Ministry of Commerce issued the Transit of Goods through Territory of Pakistan Order 2026 on April 25, bringing it into immediate effect. The order allows goods originating from third countries to be transported through Pakistan and delivered to Iran by road.

The announcement coincided with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s visit to Islamabad for talks with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and army chief Asim Munir, the latest in a series of diplomatic engagements as Pakistan seeks to mediate an end to the two-month war between Washington and Tehran.

Federal Minister for Commerce Jam Kamal Khan described the initiative as “a significant step toward promoting regional trade and enhancing Pakistan’s role as a key trade corridor”.

Iran has not publicly commented on the move, and Al Jazeera’s query to the Iranian embassy in Islamabad went unanswered.

The notification does not extend to Indian-origin goods. A separate Commerce Ministry order issued in May 2025, following the India-Pakistan aerial war that month, bans the transit of goods from India through Pakistan by any mode and remains in force.

Routes and regulations

The six designated routes link Pakistan’s main ports, Karachi, Port Qasim and Gwadar, with two Iranian border crossings, Gabd and Taftan, passing through Balochistan via Turbat, Panjgur, Khuzdar, Quetta and Dalbandin.

The shortest route, the Gwadar-Gabd corridor, reduces travel time to the Iranian border to between two and three hours, compared with the 16 to 18 hours it takes from Karachi – Pakistan’s biggest port – to the Iranian border. The Gwadar-Gabd route could cut transport costs by 45 to 55 percent compared with costs from Karachi port, according to officials.

But for Iran, firms sending their goods to the country, and transporters, all routes into Iranian territory today are viable options, with the principal maritime passage they have traditionally used – the Strait of Hormuz – blockaded by the US Navy.

Corridor shaped by conflict

The current US-Iran war began on February 28, when US and Israeli forces launched attacks on Iran.

In the weeks that followed, Iran restricted commercial navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and gas passes during peacetime, disrupting one of the most critical arteries of global trade.

Pakistan brokered a ceasefire on April 8 and hosted the first round of direct US-Iran talks on April 11, in Islamabad. The negotiations lasted nearly a day but ended without a deal. Two days later, Washington imposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports, throttling Tehran’s maritime access.

A second round of talks has since stalled. US President Donald Trump cancelled a planned visit to Islamabad by special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner last weekend.

Iran has ruled out direct negotiations with Washington while the blockade remains in place, though Araghchi told Pakistani officials that Tehran would continue engaging with Islamabad’s mediation efforts “until a result is achieved”.

The transit order appears to be a direct economic response to that impasse.

More than 3,000 containers destined for Iran have been stuck at Karachi port for several days, with vessels unable to collect the cargo. War-risk insurance premiums have surged from about 0.12 percent of a vessel’s value before the conflict to roughly 5 percent, making shipping to the region too expensive for many operators.

Shifting regional dynamics

The corridor also signals a shift away from Afghanistan, whose relations with Pakistan have deteriorated sharply.

The two sides engaged in clashes in October 2025 and again in February and March this year, with skirmishes continuing along the northwestern and southwestern borders.

The Torkham and Chaman crossings have ceased to function as reliable commercial routes since tensions escalated, limiting Pakistan’s overland access to Central Asian markets.

“This is a paradigmatic shift. Pakistan’s relations with the Afghan Taliban, the de facto rulers in Kabul, have no reset switch,” Iftikhar Firdous, cofounder of The Khorasan Diary, told Al Jazeera.

“Kabul has been diversifying away from Pakistan towards Iran and Central Asia, but this move flips the equation. Pakistan can now bypass Afghanistan entirely for westbound trade. The impact on Kabul’s transit relevance and revenue is strategic, not immediate – but it is real.”

Firdous said the implications extend beyond bilateral ties.

“This corridor also reduces Pakistan’s reliance on longer maritime routes through the Gulf. Geopolitics, security, and infrastructure will ultimately determine which corridors dominate, but it places Pakistan as the main overland gateway for China-backed trade routes into West Asia and beyond,” he said.

Minhas Majeed Marwat, a Peshawar-based academic and geopolitical analyst, urged caution. “A cornered Afghanistan is a destabilised Afghanistan, and Pakistan knows better than most what that costs,” she wrote on X on April 27.

“The opportunity here is real. So is the risk. Security on the northwestern and southwestern borders remains the variable that could unravel everything. Pakistan is positioned well. It is not yet positioned safely. Those are different things.”

Published on 29/04/2026 – 19:52 GMT+2•Updated
19:57

China has called on EU member states to revise the bloc’s proposed “Made in Europe” legislation, according to Suo Peng, trade and economy minister at China’s mission in Brussels.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The European Union is currently debating the draft, which was unveiled by the European Commission in March and aims to impose stricter conditions on foreign companies seeking access to EU public procurement and investment opportunities.

The proposal — widely interpreted as targeting Chinese firms — has already drawn a warning from Beijing. Earlier this week, China’s commerce ministry said it would consider retaliatory measures if the EU proceeds without significant changes.

“Chinese embassies in EU member states have conveyed China’s comments and suggestions to the governments of their hosting countries,” Peng told journalists in Brussels.

He added that if the EU “insists on this punishment and treats China’s enterprises in a discriminatory manner,” Beijing would be forced to respond with countermeasures.

Public procurement rules and investment limits

The so-called Industrial Accelerator Act would, if adopted by EU governments and the European Parliament, prioritise European-made products in public procurement in sectors considered strategic, including automotive, green technologies, and energy-intensive industries such as aluminium and steel.

It would also place conditions on foreign direct investment exceeding €100 million in areas such as batteries, electric vehicles, solar panels and critical raw materials.

Companies from countries with more than 40% global market share in a given sector could be required to form joint ventures with European partners and transfer technology. At least half of jobs in such projects would also need to go to EU workers.

China has criticised the measures as discriminatory, with Peng accusing the EU of double standards on technology transfer rules. He pointed to a 2018 joint statement with the United States and Japan opposing forced technology transfers.

Divisions within the EU

EU member states remain split over the proposal. France is pushing for stricter local content requirements, while Germany and others are calling for a broader approach that includes cooperation with like-minded partners.

Some countries have also warned that the rules could increase costs and limit access to innovation.

The proposal includes a reciprocity principle in public procurement, meaning the EU would only open its market to countries that grant similar access to European firms.

China, which does not currently have such an agreement with the EU, says it is open to a bilateral deal on government procurement. Peng urged Brussels to respond “as soon as possible”.

Otherwise, he warned, the plan “will seriously damage the actual interests of Chinese and European companies.”

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s national currency has plunged to new lows as authorities mobilise to dampen the impact of the naval blockade enforced by the United States.

The Iranian rial shot above 1.81 million to the US dollar on the open market by early afternoon on Wednesday before partially recovering. The embattled currency changed hands for about 1.54 million earlier this week, and its rate was about 811,000 per US dollar a year ago.

The rial had remained relatively stable over the past two months after experiencing an earlier drop as US forces amassed in the lead-up to the US-Israeli war on Iran, which began at the end of February.

The latest freefall follows on from unchecked inflation, which has been increasingly plaguing the Iranian economy as a result of mismanagement and sanctions, and continues to ravage households. Washington now has three aircraft carriers in the region and is bringing in more troops and equipment as Israel expresses readiness to restart fighting, three weeks after a ceasefire began.

Iran’s authorities this week projected a hardened stance on negotiations with Washington, and pledged to fight the naval blockade of Iran’s southern waters, which the US Central Command insisted on Tuesday had “cut off economic trade going into and coming out of” the country.

Amid threats by US President Donald Trump, the Iranian government has also tried to empower its own border provinces to import essential goods by reducing red tape. It has also allocated $1bn from the sovereign wealth fund to buy food, and made a partial policy U-turn to restart offering a preferential subsidised exchange rate with the goal of reducing prices, despite concerns about corruption.

Non-oil trade takes hit

According to customs data released by state media, Iran’s non-oil trade has been negatively affected after commercial ties were disrupted or cut off as a result of the war, and critical infrastructure was bombed.

Iran’s customs authority put the total value of non-oil trade in the Iranian calendar year that ended on March 20 at close to $110bn, with $58bn going to imports. The figure was about 16 percent lower than the year before.

The volume of non-oil trade was valued at approximately $9bn for the 11th month of the calendar year ending on February 19, and $6.46bn in the final month, indicating a drop of about 29 percent in connection with the war, which started on February 28. The final month was also about 50 percent lower than the more than $13bn estimated value for last year’s corresponding month.

Part of the drop is linked with the fact that shipping has been significantly disrupted through the Strait of Hormuz as Iran and the US spar over control of the strategic waterway. The US and Israel also directed some of their thousands of strikes against ports, naval facilities, airports, and railway networks across the country.

Iran’s top steel and petrochemical producers were also extensively bombed, as were oil and gas facilities, power stations, and major industrial zones. The US and Israel have threatened to take Iran “back to the Stone Age” through systematic bombing of civilian infrastructure like power plants.

To manage the impact and preserve domestic supply, Iranian authorities have imposed temporary restrictions on exports of steel, petrochemicals, polymers and other chemicals.

Oil exports in the crosshairs

The US is using its military capabilities and economic chokeholds to drive down Iran’s oil exports, a goal that it has also pursued over recent years through sanctions.

Since mid-April, the US military has been deploying its soldiers to take over or inspect ships transiting through waterways near Iran, in addition to targeting what is known as a shadow fleet of tankers used by Iran to circumvent sanctions and ship its oil.

Warships and thousands of troops could still launch a ground invasion or destructive aerial attacks against Iran’s Kharg and other critical islands, and the Trump administration expects increased pressure on Iran’s oil sector due to hampered access to export routes and supertankers keeping the oil stored on the water.

The US Treasury has been blacklisting refineries in China, the biggest buyers of Iranian crude oil, and going after the banking and cryptocurrency channels alleged to be facilitating Tehran’s oil trade, and having links to the IRGC – which Washington considers a “terrorist” organisation.

“We will follow the money that Tehran is desperately attempting to move outside of the country and target all financial lifelines tied to the regime,” said US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on social media.

Chinese refineries buy roughly 90 percent of Iran’s oil shipments, and imported a record 1.8 million barrels per day ⁠in March, according to Vortexa Analytics data cited by the Reuters news agency, which also said purchases were expected to slow due to worsening domestic refining and processing margins.

According to figures released by the General Administration of Customs of China, the volume of the country’s bilateral trade with Iran during the first quarter of 2026 stood at $1.55bn, down 50 percent year-on-year.

In March, the first month of the war, trade stood at $184m, which was nearly 80 percent lower than the year before and 64 percent lower than the month before. China’s imports from Iran and exports to the country were both considerably reduced as a result of the war.

The removal of the United Arab Emirates as a major trade partner and import market for Iran has also significantly affected the country’s economy, increasing its reliance on land neighbours like Turkiye and Iraq to the west and Pakistan to the east.

The UAE, a big part of the Trump-led Abraham Accords that saw multiple countries normalise relations with Israel, was heavily targeted by ballistic missiles and drones launched by Iran.

The UAE has closed down numerous Iranian institutions on its soil over the past two months, including financial facilitators, instructed Iranian citizens to leave, and has said it will take years to restore bilateral relations to previous levels.

On China, the mood at the European Commission has shifted in recent months.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

China hawks are gaining ground inside both the Commission’s powerful Directorate-General for Trade and in the cabinet of President Ursula von der Leyen, Euronews has learned, with drastic new measures being considered to counter what is seen as unfair competition.

The 27 EU commissioners are set to debate on their China strategy on 29 May, with one official saying, “It will be about acknowledging there is a problem and that something needs to be done.”

Tensions flared Monday after China’s Ministry of Commerce threatened retaliation against the EU over its Made in Europe legislation, which sets strict conditions on foreign direct investment.

An EU official told Euronews the Chinese were “playing games,” adding that the Commission’s priority remains engagement with Beijing through multiple channels set up in recent months.

However, Commission services are already working on new measures to address China’s economic threats, sources have confirmed. “We don’t see any move from the Chinese despite all the issues we have flagged with them, so there’s a reflection on whether we should do more,” one said.

Another source said the release of Germany’s trade deficit figures before Christmas marked a turning point for the Commission.

Data published last autumn by Germany Trade & Invest (GTAI) showed a record €87 billion German trade deficit with China — a wake-up call in Berlin, long focused on securing market access in China ahead of protecting domestic manufacturing.

China has since surged up the agenda for German industry, for the Bundestag — which has set up a dedicated committee — and for the Commission, whose German president has Berlin’s ear.

The EU has long grappled with cheap Chinese imports threatening its industry. Pressure intensified last year after the US slapped steep tariffs on Chinese goods, effectively shutting its market and pushing Beijing to reroute overcapacity in sectors like steel and chemicals toward Europe.

A recent report by the French High Commission for Strategy and Planning, a French government advisory body, warned that “the production cost gaps, as assessed by industry players [across Europe], have now reached levels incompatible with sustainable competition, averaging between 30% and 40%, and exceeding 60% in certain segments (industrial robotics, mechanical components).”

Under these conditions, how can the EU defend its market?

The bloc’s leverage is mainly limited to its 450 million-strong consumer base. Still, one source said it is “increasingly becoming mainstream” inside the Commission to warn Beijing that the EU market could close without rebalancing.

But the trade-offs are stark.

Chinese electric vehicles — hit with EU tariffs in October 2024 — highlight the dilemma. China depended equally on the US and EU markets for almost all its exports before Donald Trump’s return to the White House in 2025. “It cannot easily diversify its EVs as it will not sell in Africa, nor in southeast Asia, where there’s no infrastructure,” another source said.

At the same time, Europe remains reliant on China imports in many of the same sectors where China depends on Europe. “Are we to close our market to lithium batteries from China? We cannot do this overnight,” the same source said. The same applies to solar panels, laptops and medical devices.

Commission explores anti-coercion tool

The EU has trade defence tools — including anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties — but they can take at least 18 months to deploy after a complaint is filed. Two sources said the Commission is working on new instruments, but by the time they bite, the damage may already be done.

A fourth source described an overcapacity instrument as still “premature.”

However, Commission services are also mulling the Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI), which allows the EU to deploy a wide range of measures — from tariffs to restrictions on public procurement or intellectual property — in response to economic pressure from third countries.

The tool, sometimes described as a “trade bazooka”, has never been used since its creation in 2023, but resurfaced after China weaponised rare earth exports in October 2025 during its trade standoff with the US by imposing strict export controls.

Exports resumed after Washington and Beijing agreed on a one-year truce, which also covers Europe. But that deal expires in October 2026, leaving uncertainty hanging over the EU.

Brussels wants the anti-coercion tool ready if needed.

Tensions could rise further after Beijing’s threats over the Industrial Accelerator Act — the Made in Europe legislation now debated by member states and MEPs — or over pressure linked to the Cybersecurity Act, which could phase out Chinese telecom operators from the EU market.

Securing member states’ backing

However, a qualified majority of EU countries is needed to activate the ACI, and member states remain split.

“It requires a political support higher than for the traditional anti-dumping or anti-subsidies duties which can only be rejected by a reversed majority of EU countries,” a source said.

Despite the wake-up call, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz struck a softer tone in March, floating a long-term trade deal with Beijing.

But in Brussels, that idea is off the table.

“There are a number of concerns and real challenges that the European Union has consistently expressed to China that we need to see them meaningfully address before we can even talk about any future agreements or anything like that,” the Commission’s deputy chief spokesperson, Olof Gill, said.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez — who has visited China four times in three years and secured major Chinese investment — backs closer ties with Beijing.

Meanwhile, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever urged a tougher line in an 18 March letter to von der Leyen.

“We have arrived at a point of no return in which we need to make difficult choices in the short term towards China to protect our industries, economies and the well-being of our citizens in the long term,” he wrote.

France, long a proponent of a hard line on China, shares that view.

Caracas, April 24, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez hosted Colombian President Gustavo Petro for bilateral talks in Caracas on Friday. 

The meeting marked the first official visit by a head of state since the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro during a US military operation on January 3.

Following talks at Miraflores Presidential Palace, Rodríguez said both governments committed to tackling organized crime along their shared border, one of the longest in the region at over 2,200 kilometers.

“We have undertaken a very serious and concrete approach to combating criminal groups and transnational crime,” she said, announcing the development of joint military plans and “immediate” mechanisms for intelligence sharing in a new level of security cooperation.

Petro, for his part, stated that both countries would work toward the “liberation of border communities” through coordinated military, police, and social action.

“Building a fully coordinated common effort to free border populations from mafias engaged in various illegal economies,” he said, accusing irregular groups of human trafficking, drug trafficking, and illegal gold trade activities.

The leaders also agreed on economic initiatives aimed at supporting Venezuelan and Colombian populations in border regions. Petro expressed hope that these efforts would help reintegrate the two territories and boost food security.

The joint action commitments come amid escalating violence in the Catatumbo region of Colombia’s Norte de Santander department, which borders Venezuela’s Táchira state, where clashes between armed groups have displaced thousands in recent weeks.

Armed organizations operating in the area include the National Liberation Army (ELN), the Estado Mayor Central (EMC) and the Segunda Marquetalia, both descendants of the former FARC, and the Clan del Golfo, among others.

Friday’s talks also included the neighboring nations’ trade relations. Rodríguez highlighted discussions on “import substitution” between the two countries.

“It makes no sense for Colombia or Venezuela to look to other regions or hemispheres for what we can produce within our own territories,” she said, noting that bilateral trade currently stands at approximately $1.2 billion per year.

The leaders further addressed electrical interconnection projects for western Venezuela, a region heavily affected by blackouts, as well as reopening a pipeline that would allow Venezuela to export natural gas to Colombia and beyond.

Rodríguez and Petro also discussed the revival of air connectivity to boost tourism, including the development of multi-destination travel initiatives.

Present at the private meeting were Colombia’s foreign minister Rosa Villavicencio and defense minister Pedro Sánchez, alongside Venezuela’s foreign minister Yván Gil and Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello. The presidential summit followed an earlier meeting of the two countries’ Neighborhood and Integration Commission, with bilateral working groups established for a number of areas, including trade, energy and defense. 

A prior meeting scheduled between Rodríguez and Petro on the border in early March was suspended due to security concerns.

Rodríguez hosts new US chargé d’affaires

Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez also welcomed the Trump administration’s new chargé d’affaires to Venezuela John Barrett at the presidential palace on Friday.

Alongside Cabello and Gil, Rodríguez held a private meeting that reportedly focused on energy and a “long-term cooperation agenda.” For its part, the US embassy in Caracas stated that Barrett will continue implementing Washington’s “three-phase plan” for the Caribbean nation.

Barrett recently replaced Laura Dogu, who had been on the post since January. A career diplomat, he last served as chargé d’affaires in Guatemala, where he was accused of interference in magistrate elections in March.

Washington and Caracas fast-tracked a diplomatic rapprochement following the January 3 military strikes and kidnapping of Maduro. In March, the White House recognized Rodríguez as Venezuela’s sole leader, while the acting president recently thanked Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio for their “good disposition” in establishing “cooperation” between the two countries.

The diplomatic reengagement and US recognition have likewise led to a resumption of ties between Caracas and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Edited and with additional reporting by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Published on
22/04/2026 – 8:00 GMT+2

EU Trade Chief Maroš Šefčovič is visiting the US on Thursday and Friday in a bid to unlock negotiations over EU steel and aluminium exports still hit by the 50% US tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump shortly after his return to power last year.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Scrapping those tariffs was part of the EU-US trade deal struck in July 2025, which included commitments to discuss quota arrangements for steel and aluminium to replace the 50% duties.

However implementation of the broader accord — including cuts to EU tariffs on US industrial goods — has been delayed by MEPs, effectively stalling talks on metals.

Taking stock

European Commission Deputy Chief Spokesperson Olof Gill said on Tuesday that the trip will be an “opportunity to take stock of the broad sweep of EU/US trade deal and investment relations”.

He added that the focus will be on where both sides “stand” on the implementation of their “respective commitments” under the deal.

Resolving issues over the trade of steel and aluminium will be top of the agenda, Euronews has learned.

The agreement was clinched in summer 2025 in Turnberry, Scotland, by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Trump after weeks of trade tensions, during which Šefčovič made repeated trips to Washington to defuse the dispute and avert steeper tariffs.

The Commission ultimately accepted 15% duties on European exports to the US in a deal widely seen as unbalanced in Europe. The agreement is now under discussion among EU countries and MEPs before full implementation.

Šefčovič’s visit will be his first since the Turnberry accord. The deal has since been frozen several times by EU lawmakers following fresh tariff threats by Trump over Greenland.

A ruling by the US Supreme Court also reshuffled the deck, finding that most US tariffs imposed in 2025 were illegal. In the days following, the White House shifted legal grounds to maintain tariffs as part of its nationalist ‘America First’ trade agenda. However, those measures are set to expire in July, after which they will require approval from US Congress.

Pressure points

In the coming days, Šefčovič aims to ensure the US sticks to the agreed 15% tariffs. His agenda includes meetings with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. He will also head to Capitol Hill to meet members of the US Congress.

Washington has also tied the removal of steel and aluminium tariffs to EU moves to relax digital rules it sees as targeting US Big Tech firms.

While the Commission has always defended its sovereign right to legislate — insisting rules are applied without discrimination — discussions on setting up an EU-US forum on digital issues have recently surfaced.

Whether that still-vague concession will be enough to secure US movement on metals remains to be seen.

VANCOUVER — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said in a video address released Sunday that Canada’s strong economic ties to the United States were once a strength but are now a weakness that must be corrected.

In the 10-minute address, Carney spoke about his government’s efforts to strengthen the Canadian economy by attracting new investments and signing trade deals with other countries.

“The world is more dangerous and divided,” Carney said. “The U.S. has fundamentally changed its approach to trade, raising its tariffs to levels last seen during the Great Depression.

“Many of our former strengths, based on our close ties to America, have become weaknesses. Weaknesses that we must correct.”

Carney said tariffs imposed by President Trump have affected workers in the auto and steel industries. He added that businesses are holding back investments “restrained by the pall of uncertainty that’s hanging over all of us.”

Many Canadians have also been angered by Trump’s comments suggesting Canada become the 51st state.

Carney said he plans to give Canadians regular updates on his government’s efforts to diversify away from the U.S.

“Security can’t be achieved by ignoring the obvious or downplaying the very real threats that we Canadians face,” he said. “I promise you I will never sugarcoat our challenges.”

It’s not the first time Carney, who served as a central bank governor, first at the Bank of Canada and later with the Bank of England, has spoken about a shift in world power.

During a speech in January at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, he received widespread praise for condemning economic coercion by great powers against small countries.

His remarks brought a rebuke from Trump.

“Canada lives because of the United States,” Trump said after the speech. “Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.”

There was no immediate White House reaction Sunday to the address.

Carney’s comments came days after securing a majority government following special election wins and as the opposition Conservatives push him to deliver a U.S. trade deal, which was among his promises in last year’s election.

A review of the current version of the North American Free Trade Agreement among Canada, the U.S. and Mexico is scheduled for July.

In his address, Carney said he wants to attract new investments into Canada, double the size of clean energy capacity and reduce trade barriers within the country. He also emphasized Canada’s increased defense spending, reduction in taxes and efforts to make housing more affordable.

“We have to take care of ourselves because we can’t rely on one foreign partner,” he said. “We can’t control the disruption coming from our neighbors. We can’t control our future on the hope it will suddenly stop.

“We can control what happens here. We can build a stronger country that can withstand disruptions from aboard.”

Carney said simply hoping the “United States will return to normal” is not a feasible strategy.

“Hope isn’t a plan and nostalgia is not a strategy,” he said.

Carney said Canada has “been a great neighbor,” standing with the U.S. in conflicts including Afghanistan, plus two World Wars.

“The U.S. has changed and we must respond,” he said. “It’s about taking back control of our security, our borders and our future.”

Morris writes for the Associated Press.

April 19 (UPI) — Citing steep tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Sunday his country’s historically close trade and economic ties to the United States have become a “weakness.”

In a video statement posted to YouTube, the Canadian leader asserted the United States has “fundamentally changed its approach to trade, raising its tariffs to levels last seen during the Great Depression.”

This has meant that “many of our former strengths, based on our close ties to America, have become our weaknesses — weaknesses that we must correct.”

Carney’s comments as Trump’s trade war with Canada has disrupted decades of cross border cooperation, triggered in part by a broad 10% tariff slapped by Washington onto all goods not excluded under the Canada-US-Mexico free trade agreement known as CUSMA.

Significantly higher U.S. levies have also been imposed on key strategic sectors, including a 50% tariff on Canadian products that are almost entirely made of steel, aluminum or copper, and a 25% tariff on products that are “largely” made of those metals.

Many types of Canadian heavy equipment also face a 15% tariff upon entry into the United States.

Ottawa says the effect of these measures has been profound, “displacing workers, disrupting supply chains, forcing companies to rethink where they source their materials and products, and causing uncertainty that is curbing investment.”

Although Canada still has the best deal of any U.S. trading partner in an era when Trump has used the threat of tariffs and against both allies and adversaries for strategic and political ends, “we cannot rely on our most important trade relationship as we once did. We must build our strength at home,” Carney said.

“Workers in our industries most affected by U.S. tariffs in autos and steel and lumber are under threat,” he added. “Businesses are holding back investments restrained by the pall of uncertainty that’s hanging over all of us.”

Triggered by the U.S. trade actions and Trump’s oft-repeated desire to annex Canada as the “51st state,” Carney’s Liberal Party government in January made a milestone deal with China to lower some of the tariffs imposed by one another on some of their trade goods.

Under that pact, China lowered its tariffs on Canadian agricultural products, while Canada slashed its tariffs on up to 49,000 electric vehicles that are made in China.

The deal was denounced by Trump, who threatened to impose a 100% tariff on all Canadian goods sent to the United States in response.

“China will eat Canada alive, completely devour it, including the destruction of their businesses, social fabric and general way of life,” the U.S. president asserted.

But Carney on Sunday again defended his expansion of trade away from the United States, saying, “We will attract new investment so we can build more for ourselves, striking new partnerships abroad so we can sell into new markets.

“It’s about taking back control of our security, our borders and our future.”

Published on 18/04/2026 – 22:58 GMT+2•Updated
23:06

A coalition of EU-based chemical producers of titanium dioxide – a strategic chemical used in green energy and aerospace – has lodged a complaint with the Commission alleging unfair foreign subsidies against leading Chinese producer LB Group, which is seeking to acquire a UK plant of British competitor Venator, Euronews has learned.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The move follows the European Commission’s decision in January 2025 to impose anti-dumping duties on LB Group, a trade defence measure targeting low-priced imports into the EU.

Acquiring a production plant in the UK would allow the Chinese group to export its products to the European market duty-free under the EU-UK trade agreement, circumventing EU anti-dumping tariffs.

The EU chemical sector is under pressure from growing competition from Chinese rivals, which are flooding the market with overcapacity.

The alliance behind the complaint against LB Group includes several companies producing in the EU — US-based Tronox and Kronos, Czech Precheza and Slovenian Cinkarna — collectively accounting for about 90% of EU titanium dioxide production.

Enforcing the Foreign Subsidies Regulation outside the EU

Sources said the complaint was filed in December 2025, urging the European Commission to investigate the Chinese company over alleged unfair foreign subsidies used to finance the acquisition of Venator’s plant.

The EU’s Foreign Subsidies Regulation, adopted in 2022, allows the Commission to investigate non-EU companies to assess whether they benefit from distortive foreign subsidies to make acquisitions in the EU or take part in public procurement.

The tool was initially designed with China in mind, reflecting concerns over excessive state subsidies support for Chinese companies acquiring strategic EU assets or infrastructure. However, the regulation has not yet been applied outside the EU.

The plant targeted by LB Group is located in Greatham in northeast England, which left the EU in 2020 after Brexit. The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority is currently reviewing the deal and is expected to issue a decision in May.

If the European Commission opens an investigation under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation, it could set a precedent and send a strong signal globally.

The move would come as the EU chemical industry loses market share in Europe.

According to Cefic, which represents the sector in Brussels, the bloc has lost around 9% of its production capacity since 2022, resulting in the loss of 20,000 direct jobs.

Published on
15/04/2026 – 11:25 GMT+2

The European Commission on Wednesday imposed anti-dumping duties on glass fibre —a key input for the EU’s renewable industry— produced by Chinese companies operating in Egypt, Bahrain and Thailand.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The move confirms the EU’s push to curb Chinese imports entering the bloc via Belt and Road routes to sidestep tariffs on products officially labelled “made in China.”

Brussels seeks to shield its market from a surge of low-cost imports from the Asian giant, targeting goods it considers heavily subsidized or sold in the EU below production cost in China.

The tariffs on glass fibre from the three countries will range from 11% to 25.4% of the product’s value.

“The investigation confirms the existence of unfair practice, which is an important signal,” Ludovic Piraux, President of Glass Fibre Europe, said.

But he added that the measures adopted “remain insufficient to fully address the predatory strategies pursued through these investments in third countries.”

Job losses loom

China has invested $1 trillion through the Belt and Road initiative – a large-scale infrastructure programme which replaced the former silk road initiative and is aimed at strengthening connectivity, trade and communication across Eurasia, Latin America and Africa. The programme spans more than 150 countries, supporting infrastructure, transport, raw materials extraction and the relocation of industries and state-owned enterprises abroad.

As early as 2010, following an industry complaint, the Commission imposed anti-dumping duties on Chinese glass fibre imports. In the years that followed, Chinese producers established factories in Bahrain and Egypt, from which exports to the EU resumed.

By 2024, glass fibre imports from those countries, along with Thailand, accounted for 24% of the EU market. Egyptian imports alone reached 18%, with Glass Fibre Europe warning the situation could worsen.

This is not the first time the Commission has targeted Chinese products made in third countries under Belt and Road arrangements. It has previously imposed measures on aluminium foil from Thailand and glass fibre produced in Türkiye.

European glass fibre manufacturers have been pushing for action for more than a decade, alongside unions seeking to protect jobs in the sector.

The complaint which lead to Wednesday’s anti-dumping duties was first reported by Euronews in January 2025.

The industry directly employs more than 4,500 workers in the EU and says it supports hundreds of thousands of indirect jobs along the value chain.

Judith Kirton-Darling, General secretary of industriAll Europe, warned that “in the longer term”, the situation could worsen if the EU does not take “a stronger” stance on Chinese dumping.

“It is more than likely that we will face plant closures in Europe which will fundamentally undermine our industry,” she said.

April 15 (UPI) — The U.S. military’s maritime blockade of Iran has “completely halted” sea-based trade with the Middle Eastern country, U.S. Central Command said late Tuesday.

President Donald Trump announced the blockade on Sunday after negotiations to end the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran collapsed.

The blockade of 12 U.S. warships, more than 100 fighter and surveillance aircraft and more than 10,000 soldiers began at 10 a.m. EDT Monday, an effort to prohibit maritime traffic to and from all Iranian ports.

According to U.S. military officials, it covers the entire southern coastline of Iran, including ports on the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, between which lies the Strait of Hormuz.

“A blockade of Iranian ports has been fully implemented as U.S. forces maintain maritime superiority in the Middle East,” Adm. Brad Cooper, Central Command commander, said in a statement.

“In less than 36 hours since the blockade was implemented, U.S. forces have completely halted economic trade going into and out of Iran by sea.”

Central Command said earlier Tuesday that no ships had made it through during the blockade’s first 24 hours and that six vessels had complied with U.S. forces’ direction to return to an Iranian port on the Gulf of Oman.

“The blockade is being enforced impartially against vessels of all nations entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas,” Central Command said.

The blockade comes amid a two-week cease-fire between the United States and Iran that Trump announced on April 8. During the fragile truce negotiations on a permanent end to the war were to be conducted.

However, negotiations with Iran collapsed in Pakistan on Sunday, seemingly over disagreements on Iran’s nuclear program and control of the Strait of Hormuz.

Not long after the war began with the United States and Israel attacking Iran on Feb. 28, Iran sharply restricted vessel traffic to the Strait of Hormuz, an important trade route through which flows roughly 27% of the world’s maritime trade in crude oil and petroleum products as well as 20% of global liquefied natural gas trade, according to the U.S. Congressional Research Service.

Iran’s control of trade through the strait has caused gas prices to spike, threatening countries with energy crises.

The U.S. blockade appears aimed at financially squeezing Iran by cutting it off from maritime trade revenue.

According to Maid Maleki, senior fellow of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a nonpartisan Washington, D.C., research institute, the blockade could cost Iran about $435 million a day.

“The blockade makes continued resistance economically impossible,” he said in a statement.

Published on
14/04/2026 – 15:39 GMT+2

Viktor Orbán has positioned Hungary as a European centre for Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers, while disregarding the EU’s tariffs on them.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Now his political successor, Péter Magyar, appears less inclined to reverse that policy in a radical way.

At a press conference on Monday following a landslide victory against Orbán, Magyar praised China as “one of the most important, largest, and strongest countries in the world.”

“I am very happy to travel to Beijing, and we are very happy to welcome Chinese leaders here in Hungary,” he added.

Magyar also said he would “review” Chinese investments in Hungary – particularly on electric vehicles – but “not with the aim of shutting them down or preventing them from happening.”

In recent years, Hungary was eager to attract Beijing’s largeness, with BYD building its first European passenger EV factory in Szeged in 2024 and major firms such as CATL, NIO and EVE Energy investing heavily in the country.

But that open-door policy has increasingly clashed with the EU’s push to tighten scrutiny of Chinese investments, as China floods Europe with low-cost imports and as many as 600,000 job losses are projected in the EU in the bloc’s auto sector this decade amid intensifying competition from Chinese manufacturers.

Magyar will also have to deal with concerns over alleged forced labour involving Chinese workers at Hungarian plants of EV giant BYD, as well as a recent European Commission probe into unfair subsidies at the same site. Those developments have tarnished the company’s reputation and raised concerns over Beijing’s investments.

Driving more value from investment in Hungary

At his press conference on Monday, the leader of Hungary’s Tisza party did not enter details. But he made clear that Hungary would align its policy more closely with Brussels.

“Rather, the goal is to ensure that those projects comply with European Union and Hungarian environmental regulations, health procedures, and labour safety standards, and contribute to the performance of the Hungarian national economy,” Magyar added.

He also appeared determine to distance himself from Orbán’s wariness of a recent European Commission proposal on “Made in Europe,” which targets China.

The draft law, currently discussed by EU governments and MEPs, would impose stricter conditions on foreign direct investment above €100 million in sectors such as batteries, electric vehicles, solar panels and critical raw materials.

Under the proposal, investors from countries holding 40% of global market share in a given sector would be required to hire at least 50% of EU workers. Additional conditions could include foreign ownership caps below 49%, joint ventures with European partners and technology transfers.

“What we do not want — and will not accept — is for foreign companies to come, receive significant Hungarian state support, employ very few Hungarians, create little to no added value for the Hungarian economy, and at the same time endanger the quality of Hungary’s land, air, and water,” Magyar added, signalling his intention to align policy more closely with Brussels.