trade

Hours before Nithya Raman took the stage at Jewish Federation L.A.’s mayoral forum this week, Mayor Karen Bass’ campaign blasted out a press release accusing the council member of skipping a City Council Jewish Heritage Month event to appear on Hasan Piker’s livestream.

The Raman camp’s response: “The Mayor is deliberately spreading misinformation that the public record directly contradicts,” said Liz Garcia, a campaign spokesperson.

Piker is a left-wing streamer on the platform Twitch and a fierce critic of Israel. Raman appeared on his stream on May 15, where he asked her if she thought Israel was committing genocide in Palestine. She said she did.

That same day, Raman missed a Jewish Heritage Month event at City Hall. Debbie Paperman, who is on the executive board of Democrats for Israel Los Angeles, said Raman told her that she had not been feeling well.

The Bass campaign, citing the fact that Raman appeared on Piker’s stream the same day, fired off an email to reporters claiming the councilmember had lied about her reasons for missing the Jewish heritage event.

The Raman campaign said that Raman was, in fact, ill.

Video from the May 15 council meeting shows Raman was present at the start of the meeting, but no longer at her seat during the heritage event, in which Councilmember Bob Blumenfield celebrated Jewish athletes. More than an hour later, Raman was back in council to make a speech and introduce other speakers for Hapa Day, celebrating people of mixed Asian and Pacific Island heritage, during which she said she wasn’t feeling well.

Raman’s team said she was still at City Hall during the Jewish Heritage Month event, but that she left council chambers due to her illness.

She felt better later that afternoon, the Raman camp said, allowing her to appear on Piker’s show.

Paperman said she wasn’t convinced. “It happened that you were sick for the multiple hours this was going on and you happened to get better to go on this psycho’s stream?” said Paperman. “I don’t believe that.”

Piker, meanwhile, shot back at the mayor for using his name to try to dissuade voters from supporting Raman.

“Karen Bass is deploying the same nasty tactic that Donald Trump used recently at a press conference, wondering out loud why any Jewish person would vote for Democrats, due to my presence in the big tent,” he told The Times in a text message.

Piker said he will vote for Raman, though he supported Bass against billionaire Rick Caruso in 2022.

“I was also a fan of [her] past work in Cuba,” he told The Times. “Karen Bass used to be quite the radical.”

Bass swings up in new poll

Bass will need to rely on undecided Republican and conservative voters to propel her to a mayoral victory, a new poll paid for by a group supporting her found.

The incumbent mayor is trailing Raman by 4 percentage points, 39% to 35%, with a quarter of the electorate still undecided, according to the initial results from an FM3 Research poll that was commissioned by the Central City Assn.’s PAC, an independent expenditure group supporting the mayor.

When the pollsters gave likely voters additional, critical information about both candidates, Bass shot up by 5 points and took a narrow lead over Raman, 40% to 39%, with 21% undecided, according to FM3.

“The undecided voters — including many that say they will refuse to make a choice between Bass and Raman by Election Day — are disproportionately: Republicans, conservatives, 65+, homeowners, Democratic women over the age of 50 and those who do not hold a college degree,” wrote the research company in a polling memorandum.

The poll surveyed 809 likely L.A. voters from Sept. 21-28. It has a 3.5% margin of error.

“The mayoral race remains a statistical tie,” said Nella McOsker, the president of the Central City Assn. “Our poll demonstrates that some of the most reliable voting blocs swing to Bass once they fully learn both candidates’ records.”

A poll conducted between Sept. 15 and Sept. 20 by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found Raman was ahead 39% to 28%.

Raman allies engage in trash talk

A woman walks out of her home carrying a full garbage bag, then starts venting about the high cost of trash pickup.

“Karen Bass has nearly bankrupted L.A., so the city doubled my trash fees. Isn’t L.A. expensive enough?” the woman says angrily, before slamming the lid on a black trash bin.

That message is at the heart of a campaign video created by Streets For All, a transportation advocacy group now spending about $1.2 million to promote Raman and tear down Bass.

That ad is missing a key piece of information: Raman voted to hike those trash fees several times last year, even as two of her council colleagues spoke out against them.

“I was one of two no votes,” said City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who is supporting Bass’ reelection, in an interview. “She never once pushed back.”

Rodriguez called the ad misleading, saying it implies that Raman was an opponent of the fee hikes.

Michael Schneider, who runs the Streets For All campaign committee, defended the 14-second spot, saying council members hiked the trash fees to make up for bad budget decisions made by the mayor — including her support for a $2.6-billion upgrade of the Convention Center.

The council boosted the trash fee to $55.95 per month last year for small apartment buildings, up from $24.33. For single-family homes, the monthly fee was also hiked to $55.95, up from $36.32.

The city’s budget advisors said the increases were needed in large part because the monthly fees had not been increased in 17 years. As a result, L.A.’s residential trash customers were not being charged the full cost of garbage pickup, leaving the city budget to cover the difference.

“Kick it in the Park” gets Olympic makeover

L.A.’s summer of 2026 will be remembered for stifling heat, innumerable Dodgers injuries and, especially, World Cup watch parties.

Teams, corporate sponsors and the city of Los Angeles welcomed in the world, producing large crowds and kumbaya moments — with fans of opposing teams partying side-by-side in (relative) peace and harmony.

Mayor Karen Bass’ “Kick it in the Park” events drew a total of 45,000 fans over the length of the quadrennial soccer tournament. A survey of about 2,000 of them registered overwhelming support for the free shindigs.

Paul Krekorian, executive director of the mayor’s Office of Major Events, declared victory in a meeting with City Council members this week. He also said that substantial planning is already underway to bring the city even more viewing parties and “activations” during the 2028 Olympics.

While the city hosted a maximum of three viewing parties a day during the World Cup, it plans to stage as many as 15 a day when the Olympics come to town. A list has been drawn up of possible locations for the festivities — spread around every corner of the city and distant from Olympic venues to avoid overcrowding.

Among the possible viewing party locations: MacArthur Park, the Greek Theatre, Pan Pacific Park, Leimert Park Plaza, Koreatown, Penmar Recreation Center, Echo Park Lake, Angels Gate Park and the Watts Towers.

Given the welter of Olympic events, it will be a challenge to schedule the parties, whose centerpieces are usually big screen projections of the live events, with food and live performances often thrown in.

State of play

— SPLIT ON GAZA: Bass and Raman split on Tuesday over whether Israel has committed genocide in Gaza during the Israel Gaza war. The two candidates gave their opinions during a forum hosted by Jewish Federation Los Angeles. Raman said she agrees with the experts who use the term, while Bass said she would not use the term genocide to describe Israel’s counteroffensive in Gaza.

— WILDFIRE FAILURES: A long-awaited independent investigation commissioned by Gov. Gavin Newsom offered the most in-depth review of the Jan. 7, 2025, Palisades and Eaton fires, describing the chaos and poor communication that made firefighting, rescues and evacuations even more difficult. The 724-page report also cited the Los Angeles Fire Department’s failure to fully extinguish the Jan. 1 Lachman fire, which reignited days later, and Los Angeles County’s failure to provide timely evacuation alerts in Altadena.

— ESTAMOS CON WHOM?: Recent polling by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found that likely Latino voters favor Councilmember Raman over incumbent Bass by a wide margin — 45% to 21%, with 34% undecided. That’s an even bigger lead than Raman had over Bass with voters overall in the most recent Berkeley IGS/L.A. Times poll.

— VOTER GUIDES: The Times released its much-anticipated voter guides for the November election this week, including a mayoral guide and a guide to the Council District 9 race, among many others.

— OLYMPIC OBSCURA: The nonprofit organizer of the 2028 Summer Olympics, LA28, has provided less information in its annual reports than it agreed to in a 2021 contract with the city. The group has stopped reporting the contracts it signs over $1 million, leaving taxpayers with less information about the work going into the Games. LA28 says it has provided all necessary info.

The city also asked LA28 to take out a $650-million insurance policy, and agree to cover any potential losses above that amount, should the Games be canceled by a calamity.

— LAPD BLUES: Secret recordings documenting LAPD officers making racist comments have renewed questions about whether the force, which is now less than 50% white, has made forward progress on stamping out prejudice in its ranks.

— STORM’S BREWING: L.A.’s sanitation agency is bracing for the coming ‘Super’ El Niño, which could wreak havoc with the city’s Hyperion sewage treatment plant.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program went to East Hollywood in Hugo Soto-Martínez’s district on Tuesday, where they moved 61 people indoors near Beverly Boulevard and Madison Avenue. On Thursday, Inside Safe moved 27 people indoors near Louvre Street and Ralston Avenue in Pacoima in Rodriguez’s district.
• On the docket next week: On Wednesday, the City Council’s transportation committee will be discussing an independent evaluation of the city’s Vision Zero Program.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

In-depth study also says the royal house made huge profits from the Dutch colonial policies in past centuries.

A historical study has found that the Dutch royal house benefited from the country’s colonial policies in past centuries and helped the slave trade to survive.

The in-depth study, commissioned by King Willem-Alexander and conducted by Leiden University, showed the House of Orange-Nassau “actively supported Dutch colonialism for centuries, but only rarely determined colonial policy”, according to the university’s statement, published on Friday.

“The involvement of the House of Orange-Nassau was wholehearted and without any real reservations,” Dutch historians and human rights experts concluded after a three-year study looking at the period from 1600 to the present.

“The research leaves us in no doubt that the House of Orange shares responsibility for the survival over the centuries of the Dutch slave trade and slavery,” the study said, noting that most of the rulers showed no objections to slavery.

King Willem-Alexander said on Friday he was personally affected by the “explicit” conclusions of the study.

“It is a painful and confronting conclusion. A conclusion that affects me, even though I am three generations removed,” Willem-Alexander said in a speech at the presentation of the research.

“We know the effects of colonialism and slavery are still being felt today. Discrimination and economic exploitation unfortunately happen every day,” he added.

The study also showed that the royal family at times profited substantially from the colonial system, mostly from trade in the Dutch East Indies, modern-day Indonesia.

In the 19th century, for instance, profits accumulated to about $650m in modern terms, the researchers said.

On the other hand, the royal family earned “almost nothing” from the slave trade, the research showed.

Apologies without reparations

The Dutch monarch, who in 2023 apologised for his ancestors’ lack of action against slavery, highlighted their lack of “counter-current leadership” in the face of colonialism.

The House of Orange has ruled the Netherlands since the late 16th century, first as “stadtholders” who presided over the republic, and later as the royal house when the Netherlands became a monarchy.

For most of this time, the Dutch ruled over vast colonies in Southeast Asia and the Caribbean, including what is now Indonesia and Suriname.

The findings could stir up the debate around reparations in the Netherlands. The Dutch government apologised in 2022 after acknowledging the Dutch state bore responsibility for transatlantic slavery. King Willem-Alexander apologised the following year.

The government at the time ruled out reparations, instead creating a 200 million euro ($238m) fund for social initiatives, which anti-racism campaigners have dismissed as insufficient.

The National Institute for the Dutch Slavery Past and Heritage (NiNsee) lauded the king for commissioning the study but said it should lead to a next phase.

“Research impacts society when the new insights into the past contribute to awareness, dialogue, corrections and additions to our national history in the school curriculum and the conversation about responsibility and reparatory justice,” NiNsee director Bianca Groen Gallant said.

The Dutch played a major role in the global slave trade from the 17th century until the Netherlands abolished slavery in the second half of the 19th century.

Just last week, Joey Porter Jr. told reporters he “definitely” would play for the Pittsburgh Steelers this season despite a contract standoff and a lingering back issue.

That’s not going to happen. The Steelers have traded the fourth-year cornerback to Dallas for a second-round 2028 draft pick and a sixth-round 2027 pick, the Cowboys announced Thursday morning.

“Here I come…… Dallas,” Porter wrote on a post to his Instagram Stories early Thursday.

The son of a former Steelers great — Joey Porter Sr. won a Super Bowl with the Steelers during his 13 years as an NFL linebacker and spent several years with the team as a defensive coach — Porter was selected by Pittsburgh in the second round of the 2023 draft. He broke up 31 passes over his first three seasons.

Porter missed all of training camp and preseason while on the Steelers’ physically unable to perform list because of the reported back issues. During the same period of time, he and the Steelers were unable to come to terms on a contract extension on the rookie deal that was set to expire after this season. The Steelers do not negotiate contracts once a season has begun.

Since the season started, Porter has been a limited participant in practices but was inactive in all three games. As the Steelers prepared to face the Cleveland Browns on “Thursday Night Football” this week, Porter was listed as a full participant in practice, although the team added a back injury to Porter’s injury status on Wednesday.

Porter is the third Steelers player traded to the Cowboys in the last two years, following receiver George Pickens last year and offensive lineman Broderick Jones just before this season started. First-year Steelers coach Mike McCarthy was the Cowboys coach from 2020 to 2024.

Last year, a contract dispute led Dallas to deal star edge rusher Micah Parsons to the Green Bay Packers just before the start of the regular season.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Published on
28/09/2026 – 12:25 GMT+2

Brussels and Beijing are fighting over quotas that would limit Chinese imports to the EU market, as the Europeans seek to rebalance their trade relationship with China, Euronews has learned.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Both started intense negotiations last June over EU and Chinese access to each other’s markets, with an October deadline set by the European Commission to reach “tanglible” results. However, China is pushing hard against the EU’s attempts to protect its market.

According to one person familiar with the matter, the Commission, which is negotiating on behalf of the 27 EU countries on trade issues, wants China to accept quotas on specific products.

However, it is unclear how China would accept and respect such quotas.

Trade defence mechanisms delayed

According to media reports, so-called “voluntary export restrictions” have been pushed by the Commission for electric vehicles. But Beijing’s trade minister rejected them in a statement earlier this month.

If China accepted such a system of restrictions, it would mean that it voluntarily limits its exports to the EU on the basis of a deal negotiated with the Commission, sparing the EU from adopting defensive trade measures that might be seen as an aggressive move by China.

Technical negotiations are in their final stretch as the October deadline is approaching.

Director General of DG Trade at the Commission, Ditte Juul Jørgensen, travelled to China last week for two days of heated discussions, and EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is due to be in Beijing on 8 and 9 October for political talks, ahead of a key meeting of EU leaders in Brussels.

To give negotiations a chance, the Commission has delayed the adoption of trade defence mechanisms aiming to protect the EU chemical industry, according to another person familiar with the matter. The chemical industry is one of the sectors most threatened by Chinese competition in the EU.

However, the threat also targets other sectors, making the rebalancing of the trade relationship “existential” for the Europeans, EU Industry and Trade Commissioner Stéphane Séjourné told Euronews last week.

According to the Commission, the EU already lost 250,000 industrial jobs last year, particularly concentrated in energy-intensive sectors and automotive supply chains.

The United States and China have unveiled a list of goods recommended for reduced tariffs following last week’s summit between Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.

The release of the list on Sunday comes after Trump and Xi agreed to work towards lowering tariffs on $60bn worth of trade.

The agreement, which covers $30bn of each side’s imports, identifies 77 Chinese goods and more than 1,600 US products to be considered for more favourable tariff treatment.

Chinese goods on the list include microwave ovens, fish hooks, artificial flowers and weighing scales.

US exports identified for lower tariffs include poultry, dairy products, noodles, eggs, peanuts, canned tomatoes, pure-breed breeding horses, and silk.

US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the agreement would improve market access for about 30 percent of US exports to China and also benefit US consumers.

“The Trump Administration will continue to pursue fair, balanced, and reciprocal trade with China by ensuring compliance with commitments on agricultural and energy purchases, pursuing balanced trade in non-sensitive goods, and securing market access for American farmers, manufacturers, businesses, and workers,” Greer said in a statement.

China’s Ministry of Commerce, which confirmed the list on Monday, shortly after the White House announcement, said the sides would discuss “a reciprocal tariff reduction framework of $30 billion for $30 billion, aiming to reach a consensus”.

“This arrangement will help stabilize China-US trade, create better conditions for Chinese exports of relevant products to the US, meet domestic market demand, and strengthen trade cooperation in agricultural products, energy, manufactured goods, and consumer goods,” the ministry said in a statement.

While Trump and Xi’s summit was heavy on pomp and ceremony, their talks wrapped up on Friday with few concrete announcements on the myriad divisions between the superpower rivals, which span everything from trade to artificial intelligence and Taiwan.

Trump and Xi, who have held three face-to-face summits since last October, are expected to meet again at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Shenzhen, China, in November, and the Group of 20 gathering in Miami, Florida, in December.

Trade between the US and China, the world’s two largest economies, has declined substantially since Trump, a longtime critic of free trade policies, returned to the White House in January last year.

Two-way trade totalled $495bn in 2025, down 25 percent from the previous year, according to the US Trade Representative.

Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, said the latest announcement did not point to a major shift in US-China trade.

“Instead, both sides have largely listed goods that do not move the needle on overall trade flows,” Elms told Al Jazeera.

“They may reduce some prices in the US for consumers, but none is going to make a dramatic difference in inflation figures or result in meaningful sighs of relief by most US buyers,” Elms added.

“The same is broadly true with the Chinese list. Although there are many different agricultural products on the list, most are not actually exported to China or not exported in meaningful quantities.”

China said on Monday that a two-month extension of its trade truce with the United States would give both sides more time to assess the implementation of their existing arrangements and discuss further steps to resolve economic and trade disputes.

China’s Commerce Ministry confirmed that the truce would remain in place through January 10, saying the extension would provide a “relatively stable and predictable policy environment” for businesses and allow the two countries to continue their talks.

The extension was among the main outcomes of a summit between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump in Washington last week, their second meeting this year.

Background

The United States and China have spent years imposing tariffs and other trade restrictions on each other, with tensions extending beyond tariffs to technology, investment, supply chains and market access.

The latest extension follows an agreement by the two sides to establish a trade council that will oversee discussions on a range of economic issues.

One of its first tasks will be to discuss reciprocal tariff reductions covering about $30 billion worth of goods, with the aim of maintaining more stable economic and trade relations between the two countries.

China’s Commerce Ministry said the arrangement would also create better conditions for Chinese exporters seeking access to the US market.

The two sides will hold regular discussions on investment opportunities and barriers, policy transparency and predictability, and concerns raised by businesses.

Why it matters

The extension gives US and Chinese companies more time to operate under a relatively predictable trade environment while negotiators work through remaining disputes.

Agriculture is one of the main areas covered by the latest arrangements. A White House list showed that China plans to reduce tariffs on a range of US agricultural products, including corn, wheat, dairy products and meat, although soybeans were not included.

The proposed cuts appear linked to a US-stated Chinese commitment to purchase $17 billion worth of agricultural products. China has already resumed large-scale purchases of US soybeans under an agreement reached last year that called for annual purchases of 25 million metric tons.

The countries will also establish an agriculture working group under the new trade council, with its first meeting expected before the end of the year.

Energy trade is another part of the agreement. China will import 10 million metric tons of US coal annually in 2027 and 2028, according to the White House. That would account for about 2% of China’s annual coal imports. US liquefied natural gas and oil were not included in the list.

The arrangements extend beyond traditional trade. The two countries have agreed to establish a communication channel for artificial intelligence related incidents and hold another dialogue by the end of November.

China will also consider approving foreign financial institutions, including US backed firms, to operate and open branches in the country. Washington and Beijing will meanwhile continue discussions on increasing direct flights between the two countries.

What’s next

The immediate focus will be on implementing the agreements reached at the presidential summit.

The agriculture working group is expected to meet before the end of the year, while the AI dialogue is due to continue by the end of November. The two countries will also use the new trade council to discuss tariffs, investment, market access and regulatory concerns.

The extension runs until January 10, giving negotiators another two months to evaluate whether the existing arrangements are being implemented and determine what further agreements can be reached.

Whether the two sides can turn the temporary truce into longer-term trade arrangements will depend on progress across the different areas covered by their negotiations, including tariffs, agricultural purchases, investment and technology.

With information from Reuters,

Relations strain further as Afghanistan and Pakistan trade accusations over terrorism and cross-border violence.

Afghanistan’s Ministry of Defence said its forces killed 28 fighters in the eastern province of Nuristan who had crossed the border from Pakistan.

In a statement posted to X, the Taliban’s defence ministry confirmed it had engaged in clashes with the opposing group on Sunday.

The defence ministry alleged that most of the fighters were former Afghan government security personnel recruited by Pakistan’s intelligence services with promises of asylum and well-paid employment in foreign countries.

The defence ministry claimed the fighters included ISIL (ISIS) fighters who were supported by Pakistani militias.

Pakistan’s Ministry of Information and Broadcasting rejected the allegations, describing them in a post on X as “frivolous, baseless and devoid of any truth”.

Pakistan denied that its security forces or intelligence agencies were involved in clashes in Nuristan, had recruited or trained former Afghan security personnel, or had facilitated ISIL (ISIS) or other armed groups in Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s information ministry also said the Taliban “should take credible and verifiable action against terrorist organisations operating from its territory” and fulfil its obligation so that “Afghan soil will not be used for terrorism against Pakistan or any other country rather than attempting to deflect responsibility through fabricated accusations”.

Escalating tensions

The clashes follow increasing tension between the two countries.

Last week, Pakistan launched air strikes on 10 locations in Afghanistan it said were used to store and launch drones, some of which were used in cross-border attacks.

The Pakistani air strikes on Thursday killed at least four people, a spokesman for the Afghan Taliban government said while promising to deliver an “appropriate response”.

Pakistan has repeatedly accused Afghanistan of sheltering fighters who attack its territory, a charge Kabul denies.

Sunday’s incident also follows Pakistani air strikes in Afghanistan on September 21 that Islamabad said killed 28 fighters. Afghan officials said civilians were killed and the U.N. mission in Afghanistan confirmed three civilian deaths.

BEIJING — It’s unclear if President Trump’s elaborate reception of his Chinese counterpart in Washington dazzled President Xi Jinping, but for the Chinese public, it made quite an impression.

Trump’s rare welcome of Xi and his wife, Peng Liyuan, at the airport, as well as the bilateral and cultural events the leaders attended were closely covered — and praised — by Chinese state media. Those who watched at home saw a China elevated in status.

“I read the news that the U.S. reception standards for President Xi are very high,” Xiang Ziyu, a postgraduate student in Beijing, told The Associated Press. “I’m quite impressed because it shows that our country has become really powerful.”

That takeaway was shared by several people interviewed by the AP as well as in comments on Chinese social media, which praised China’s cooperation with the United States.

The official People’s Daily newspaper allocated the entire front page to the trip, featuring six photos of the Xi-Trump meetings.

Meanwhile, on the Chinese search engine Baidu, the three most popular search topics on Friday were the talks between Trump and Xi; the state dinner attended by Xi and Peng; and greetings extended by Xi to Chinese people on the occasion of the Mid-Autumn Festival being celebrated on Friday.

Shen Zuohang, a Beijing resident, felt reassured by the coverage and by Trump and Xi’s seeming agreeability on topics like trade, artificial intelligence and security.

“We have no trade war and no military conflict. Even on the issue of Taiwan we are moving in a good direction instead of having heated confrontation,” Shen said.

“The two sides are handling issues in a more acquiescent way.”

According to China’s Foreign Ministry, Xi called on Trump to oppose the independence of Taiwan, an island democracy China claims as its own territory, and to handle the issue with caution. Trump did not immediately make comments on Taiwan, but had previously described U.S. arms sales to the island as open to negotiations with China.

Xiang, the student, said the summit overall sent a positive signal and will help improve the Chinese public’s opinion of the relations between the two countries.

“It is better than not communicating,” he said.

Associated Press video producer Wayne Zhang in Beijing and writer Simina Mistreanu in Taipei, Taiwan, contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s trade war with Canada could intensify the headwinds Republicans are navigating ahead of the November midterms, with its effects poised to reverberate in northern battleground states with crucial Senate races.

With the election less than six weeks away, Republicans are facing an increasingly bleak outlook, as new polls this week showed voters favoring Democrats by as much as 12 points amid widespread cost-of-living anxiety and low approval for Trump.

The escalating beef with Canada — Trump attacked the country anew on social media Wednesday — stands to heighten voters’ economic worries and add to the GOP’s political challenge in dead-heat races, analysts said.

“It doesn’t make things easier. It’s not helping,” said Rusty Hills, a University of Michigan public policy professor and onetime chair of the Michigan Republican Party.

The president’s unpopular policies on the war in Iran, the economy and data centers have already handed Republican candidates the tough task of appearing responsive to Americans’ frustration with cost-of-living issues without alienating Trump and his voter base.

The trade war, said Lance Dutson, a Maine Republican media strategist, puts “another log on the fire” of the affordability issue.

The tariffs have appeared unpopular in recent polling, including among a majority of independent voters. Though they are not expected to dramatically increase consumer prices, they could affect voters’ perception of the economy — and even small economic impacts on certain industries, such as auto manufacturing in Michigan, could have an effect in very close midterm races, experts said.

Trump’s new import bans on some Canadian goods are set to begin next week, a response to retaliatory tariffs Canada levied earlier this month. Trump argues that Canada has “been ripping off” the United States and that tariffs will help domestic manufacturers.

On Wednesday, the president inaccurately claimed on Truth Social that Canada is allowing “millions and millions” of immigrants into its country.

“It is a Liberal takeover that will end very badly. Already showing up in their numbers. Big unemployment. ‘Oh Canada!” the president wrote on social media Wednesday morning.

Five of the nine states most likely to decide Senate control border Canada — Alaska, Ohio, Michigan, New Hampshire and Maine. Two more, Texas and Iowa, also do substantial trade with Canada.

Democrats must retain their Senate seats including New Hampshire and Michigan and flip four of the other states to win a majority, a tall task. As the landscape worsens for Republicans, however, some are testing how much they can distance themselves from Trump.

“It’s a tightrope, there’s no question,” Hills said. “[Candidates] are looking for some wiggle room on some of these issues like the war and prices and Canada tariffs, because they need every independent and swing voter they can get.”

A majority of Americans oppose raising tariffs on Canadian goods, including 64% of independents, an Economist/YouGov poll found. Only 14% of independents said they supported additional U.S. tariffs on Canada in a late August Ipsos poll.

And in Michigan, 68% of independent voters disapprove of the tariffs, a poll this month from the Washington Post and Schar School found.

“The more we put tariffs on stuff, the more they put tariffs on stuff … prices are just ultimately going to go up for all of us,” said one Michigan swing voter in a Sept. 9 focus group conducted by the firm Engagious, in which 11 of 13 participants said the trade war was bad for the state.

The highest costs of the tariffs will be concentrated within a few industries, including auto and other manufacturing, dairy, and alcohol and spirits, said Alex Durante, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation. The tariffs likely won’t create a major change for consumers, but the general impression that tariffs can contribute to higher prices might turn off voters who are already worried about inflation, he said.

Counter-tariffs imposed by Canada in response to U.S tariffs last year resulted in a 6% increase in the prices of affected goods, researchers found in paper published by the Journal of Monetary Economics.

Canadian lumber products at Gutherie Lumber in Livonia, Mich., in August.

(Paul Sancya / Associated Press)

“This trade war is certainly not helping the president and his party in the midterms,” Durante said. “What’s weighing on the top of people’s minds is this general affordability crisis … and they realize that tariffs are another factor that is impacting affordability.”

The latest escalation of the trade dispute began in July, when Trump threatened new 50% tariffs on some Canadian goods, reinvigorating a conflict that began with tariffs the president imposed in 2025.

The two countries began trade talks, but the negotiations fell apart in late August, and Trump imposed tariffs on about $20-billion worth of Canadian goods. Canada retaliated with tariffs on about $20-billion worth of American goods that took effect Sept. 8. Trump then announced import bans on some Canadian goods, including certain alcohol and dairy products, which go into effect next week.

Construction and farm equipment in Illinois, aluminum and pipe products in New York, and iron and steel products in Ohio are among the goods targeted by Canada’s counter-tariffs, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported. In California, about 10.5% of the state’s Canadian imports are exposed to the counter-tariffs imposed by Canada.

Democrats have seized on the issue as another way to tie Republican candidates to Trump’s policies, something that analysts said may have varying degrees of success in different swing states.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins campaigns in August in Kittery, Maine.

(CJ Gunther / Getty Images)

In Maine and New Hampshire, where the Republican Senate nominees have criticized Trump’s move, the tariff issue may be less likely to stick. Efforts to tie Republicans to Trump have historically been less successful in the region because of its independent streak, said Jim Merrill, a veteran Republican strategist in New Hampshire.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins warned the White House against imposing tariffs and successfully pushed for the administration to exempt road salt and cement this month. She told Politico that the Trump administration had “very much underestimated” the effect of the tariffs on Maine residents.

Republican John Sununu, a former senator who is running to retake the seat in New Hampshire, has also criticized the tariffs, saying a trade war with Canada “doesn’t make any sense.” He indicated he would support legislation in Congress to restrain the president’s tariff powers.

Elsewhere, Senate nominees have walked a careful line on tariffs. In Alaska, Sen. Dan Sullivan has largely avoided the issue, even as Democrats there have used it to ramp up attacks on his record in recent days. In Ohio, former Sen. Jon Husted told the National Review in August that the public “would like to understand the strategy behind what the president’s trying to do.”

Former Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan, the Republican Senate nominee, told reporters over the weekend that he was in favor of “good” tariffs that would help Michigan and opposed to “bad” tariffs that would hurt the state.

Focusing on issues other than tariffs may be the right strategy on the campaign trail, Hills said.

“He’d much rather be talking about the Republican plan for affordability,” Hills suggested. “There’s interesting things we need to be talking about in order to win this election, and this isn’t one of them.”

The red carpet was rolled out, and a trade truce was extended. Yet, beneath the pomp and pageantry of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s state visit with US leader Donald Trump on Thursday, Washington and Beijing remain locked in a much deeper strategic rivalry.

Xi arrived in Washington, DC on Wednesday evening for talks on Thursday, and Trump was there to meet him personally on the tarmac.

The meeting was the first state visit by a Chinese leader to the US in 11 years. But it is also the third time in less than a year that the two men have met face to face, as the two powers remain uneasily gridlocked in competition over AI, rare-earth metals, the question of Taiwan, and the Iran war.

Overhanging it all is the paused, but simmering, trade war between their two nations.

Almost as soon as Trump began his second term in the White House in January 2025, up went tariffs on Chinese goods as he accused China of facilitating the flow of fentanyl, a deadly drug, to the US. Beijing responded with its own levies, then restricted exports of valuable rare-earth metals which are crucial for the development and manufacture of everything high-tech, from smartphones to fighter jets. At one point, tariffs were heading towards 150 percent before being paused to allow time for talks.

Finally, the two leaders called a truce on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in South Korea on October 30, and they met once more, in May, when Trump travelled to Beijing.

As Xi landed in Washington on Wednesday this week, the Trump administration announced that the two countries had agreed to extend an October 2025 truce which had offered some respite from the punishing tariffs, produced an agreement from China to buy more soyabeans from the US and delayed the ban on rare-earth exports from China until January 10. The prospect of a much-longed-for trade deal appeared to be in the air when US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News he had met Chinese ‌Vice Premier He Lifeng before Xi’s visit to “see if we could ⁠do a bigger deal as opposed to just a series ⁠of smaller things”.

But analysts have, for the most part, shot down such hopes. Beyond tariffs, they say, the simmering conflict between the two powers now encompasses new US sanctions on buyers of Russian oil – namely China – and sweeping investment and research restrictions, never mind the intensifying race for dominance in artificial intelligence.

“The two-month extension isn’t a bridge to a grand bargain – it’s a temporary sandbag holding back a structural flood,” Beijing-based Einar Tangen, a senior fellow at the Center for International Governance Innovation, told Al Jazeera.

Theatrics or continued thaw in tensions?

In fact, the truce is little more than “transactional theatre” – an attempt at good optics before the upcoming US midterm elections – Tangen said.

Trump’s deeply unpopular war on Iran has already inflicted severe damage to his chances in that vote. Democrats are leading in the polls amid concerns about the rising cost of energy, triggered by the war which the US started. Trump ultimately needs wins on other issues.

The current truce with China serves a purpose, therefore, but is fragile enough to be undone the moment political utility shifts for Trump, Tangen said.

“Success in January won’t be measured by what is solved, but by whether the knot is left tight enough to hold, but not kill,” said Tangen.

Phillippe Le Corre, professor of international relations and Asian studies at France’s ESSEC Business School, said the length of the truce extension indicates clearly that a more permanent deal remains out of grasp.

“The extensions are getting shorter and shorter, which means they haven’t found a common ground on many issues,” Le Corre told Al Jazeera.

“The two-month extension is a terrible outcome for the US. Nothing is resolved, and many Damocles’ swords are still hanging over Washington’s head,” he added.

Trump’s entire China policy, Le Corre argued, is in fact short-sighted. “That is bringing the world a lot of uncertainty,” he said.

Some analysts are more hopeful, but not much. Sun Chenghao, a fellow at the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University in Beijing, described the extension of the trade truce as a “useful interim step”. It shows that both sides want to preserve the recent easing of tensions, which is meaningful progress, he said.

“From China’s perspective, a sustainable agreement needs reciprocal benefits and greater policy predictability,” Sun told Al Jazeera. “Additional purchases cannot indefinitely compensate for uncertainty over tariffs, technology restrictions and market access.”

The extension’s value, however, will depend on whether it produces “concrete commitments” from Beijing and Washington, Sun added.

A game of ‘economic chicken’

There is motivation to get a deal done, analysts say. Any escalation in the US-China trade war will be costly for both sides.

But there is some way to go. A Congressional Research Service report in July 2026 noted that Chinese goods exported to the US still face tariffs of 36.5 percent, while US goods entering China are taxed at 31 percent.

Any higher, and they will raise import and manufacturing costs in the US, squeeze margins and increase pressure on consumer prices, said Sun. They would also hurt US farmers and industrial exporters, he added, just as the US faces pressure from the rising costs of its war on Iran, which have pushed it into a record national debt of $40 trillion two years earlier than expected.

“Washington is playing a high-stakes game of economic chicken with a $40 trillion debt load, an inflationary sword of Damocles, zero fiscal cushion to absorb a truce collapse and a dependence [on] Chinese industrial and manufacturing inputs,” Tangen said.

US consumers and the economy in general will find it tough to survive yet another inflationary shock from renewed tariffs “at a time when the federal budget already operates like a high-wire Ponzi scheme”.

Then there is the AI race, which no one can afford to lose. According to Jon Bateman, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a partial “decoupling” of US and Chinese technology ecosystems is under way. US policymakers have pushed to become less dependent on Chinese tech and “to secure America’s technological future in the context of a rising China”, Bateman writes.

But that will not help if there is a collapse in valuations of companies in the AI sector, which currently drive global stock markets. An AI valuation collapse, Tangen warned, “could trigger a financial tsunami that makes 2008 look tame – making technological decoupling meaningless as the world is plunged into a depression”.

Despite the trade war and Trump’s tariffs, China’s trade with other countries has risen sharply, with the country registering a $1.2 trillion global trade surplus last year. But an escalation of the trade war with the US would nevertheless spell increased pressure on export orders, employment in exposed industries and business confidence, said Sun.

Beijing does hold one crucial ace card – it is sitting on 60 percent of the world’s known deposits of rare-earth minerals, said Le Corre. It processes 90 percent of them, too. These are the metals that all countries need supplies of for semiconductors, technological components and the manufacture of weapons, to name but a few. Last year, China began to make use of that leverage by restricting exports of five of the 12 rare-earth metals it mines in April. Then, in October, it prepared to restrict seven more – until the trade truce happened. Plans for the export restrictions are not shelved, however, merely on hold.

“[China] understood this over the past year and they are certainly not going to give up on this,” said Le Corre.

“Washington is hostile, but it is hooked,” Tangen said. “You cannot threaten China with secondary sanctions on energy while desperately needing its rare-earths to fuel your military-industrial base.”

A drawn-out path to durability

The path to a lasting US-China trade deal will be long and rocky. First, any new tariff reductions will need more coverage and duration, said Sun.

For a deal to last, it would also require “more predictable licensing and actual deliveries of rare earths and critical minerals; restraint in expanding technology restrictions; and market access reflected in regulatory approvals and completed transactions”, he said.

A durable agreement also needs regular consultations and a process for resolving complaints. If all this can be hammered out then, just maybe, there might be a chance, Sun said.

Tangen and Le Corre were less optimistic, however. “The US view of China as an existential threat has to change before there can be solutions,” said Tangen.

Le Corre, meanwhile, said that while China is a long-term planner, “durable is a word that can hardly be associated with Trump.”

The existing trade truce also risks breaking down if there are new unilateral tariffs, broader technology or mineral restrictions, or disputes over whether commitments have been fulfilled, said Sun.

Tensions over Taiwan, which China claims as its own territory, but for which the US approved an $11.1bn arms sale in December last year, could also trigger a breakdown in trade relations, the analysts said.

“Taiwan remains the ultimate low-probability, catastrophic-impact tail risk – where a single round of arms sales can snap a multibillion-dollar trade truce in an instant,” Tangen noted.

Published on 22/09/2026 – 11:54 GMT+2•Updated
12:00

The European Commission struck a trade agreement with the Philippines on Tuesday, stepping up its diversification strategy across the Indo-Pacific region.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The deal comes more than a year after the US introduced sweeping new tariffs on many of its trading partners, prompting retaliatory measures and adding to global trade tensions.

Since then, the EU has been seeking new trade ties, recently concluding major deals with India, Australia and Indonesia.

“This agreement sends a clear signal that the EU is reinforcing its engagement with the Indo-Pacific,” EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič said on Tuesday.

“Half of global consumers are covered by European Free trade agreements. Nobody else has this advantage.”

“Squeeze on supply chains”

The new agreement will give EU businesses access to a market of 113 million people, and remove over 94% of customs duties. It will cover more than 97% of bilateral trade, including EU exports of machinery, medicines and medical appliances, as well as agri-products such as meat, pork, poultry and spirits.

Exports from the Philippines are dominated by semiconductors, integrated circuits and industrial machinery.

The deal should also facilitate EU investment in raw materials in the Philippines, as the EU seeks to move away from China, which holds a monopoly on key raw materials.

Bilateral trade in goods between the EU and the Philippines was €17.6 billion in 2025, while trade in services reached €10.3 billion in 2024. The stock of EU foreign direct investment in the Philippines amounted to €15.4 billion.

Šefčovič also said there was a “mutual interest” with countries in the wider Indo-Pacific area “to address the current global turbulence” and “the squeeze on the supply chains.”

Brussels says China has weaponised critical products for EU industry such as chips and rare earths in 2025, jeopardising whole sectors such as the car industry.

The Commissioner added that trade deals with Thailand and Malaysia were next on the EU agenda, with an agreement with Bangkok foreseen by the end of the year.

The European Union and Canada last week unveiled plans for an ambitious new partnership that could eventually give Canada a form of associate EU membership. Yet their existing landmark agreement remains unfinished business.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) was signed in 2016 and has applied provisionally since 2017, removing almost all tariffs and helping drive a sharp increase in transatlantic trade. But ten EU countries – Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Poland and Slovenia – have still not ratified it.

The contrast was underlined last week when European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen invited Canada to deepen its economic and security ties with the bloc.

“We will move from CETA to an Alliance for the Future to create a common prosperity and economic security space,” von der Leyen told MEPs and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in Strasbourg.

Despite not being fully ratified, the deal provisionally entered into force in 2017.

But what is CETA and why is its ratification blocked?

What is in the EU-Canada trade agreement?

CETA was concluded in 2016 after seven years of negotiations and often heated debate across EU member states.

The agreement removed tariffs on 98% of goods traded between the EU and Canada, covering products ranging from wine and cars to chemicals. It also opened up more of the Canadian market to European companies in sectors including financial services, telecommunications and transport.

The Commission says the agreement boosted EU-Canada bilateral trade in goods and services by 80% in 2025 compared to 2016, when CETA was signed, reaching €130 billion, up from €72.1 billion recorded nine years before. The EU has a trade surplus of €16 billion in goods and €9,7 billion in services.

For agricultural products, it allows 143 European products with the status of geographical indications (GIs) to be sold in Canada, protecting them from imitation. The deal also includes quotas for EU cheese exported to Canada (32,000 tonnes per year), Canadian beef (50,000 tonnes) and pork (80,000 tonnes) to the EU. It also bans imports of Canadian products containing prohibited substances, such as growth hormones.

Only 3% of the beef quotas were filled between 2021 and 2023, due to the EU’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) rules, which make it costly for Canadian beef producers to export, according to a Commission assessment.

Why is the ratification blocked?

Concerns over food safety and environmental standards are among the reasons CETA has faced resistance in EU countries. European farmers have also raised concerns about unfair competition from Canadian products, arguing that some of Canada’s production rules are less stringent than those in the EU.

CETA opponents also criticised the deal’s Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions. Those let companies bring a claim against the state before an arbitration tribunal if its government adopts a law that discriminates against a company and harms its profits. The tribunals were ad hoc, composed of private arbitrators.

However, controversies around a system that might favour business lobbies led the Commission to include safeguards and replace the Investor-State Dispute Settlement mechanism with an Investment Court System with permanent judges and an appeal mechanism. The EU and Canada have also introduced provisions to safeguard their right to regulate policies aiming to protect public health and safety, the environment or social protection. But opponents say that the safeguards won’t be enough to protect such policies. It is planned that the courts will only come into force once the deal is ratified by all 27 member states.

When will the EU fully ratify the deal?

There is no clear timetable, not least because the ratification process is effectively blocked in several member states.

For instance, in France, the Senate rejected the deal in 2024, and the government then blocked its submission to the National Assembly, fearing a full rejection.

In Poland, the ratification process is also frozen, as well as in Italy, where it has been blocked since the government rejected it in 2018, considering Italian GIs were not given enough protection. Italian MEP Carlo Fidanza, from the Brothers of Italy party, recently said that there were few chances the deal would be submitted to parliament before the December 2027 elections.

Abbotsford, British Columbia – Every second day, 28,000 litres of raw milk leave Casey Pruim’s farm in Abbotsford in western Canada, entering a distribution system built on the assumption that the milk and the products made from it will have somewhere to go.

While most is consumed in Canada, some had been sold across the border to the United States.

Those sales have largely come to a standstill since US President Donald Trump’s 50 percent tariff on $20bn in Canadian goods, including dairy products, came into effect on August 22.

Pruim, who is also chair of the British Columbia Dairy Association representing about 400 dairy farmers across the province, told Al Jazeera that Canadian farmers do not individually decide which products are exported.

Instead, producers such as Pruim –  whose farm has 330 cows milked three times a day  –  sell into the provincial milk-marketing system, which distributes milk to processors according to demand, including for products exported to the US.

If a processor loses US demand, it may require less milk, with the impact then spread across the provincial pool.

Dylan Kruger, director of public affairs at BC Dairy, told Al Jazeera “there is still considerable uncertainty around the impact of the US tariffs”.

He said it was too early to know how the industry would be impacted or whether milk no longer sold to the US could be sold elsewhere, mitigating financial losses.

But the tariffs and wider trade tensions have already introduced uncertainty and instability for businesses.

“If the processor who’s exporting some of his product to the United States can no longer sell into that market because he’s now priced out of the market with a 50 percent tariff, that’s how it would impact the dairy farm,” Pruim said.

Pruim said if processor demand is squeezed, farmers would be forced to dump the milk. In the worst-case scenario, the herd has to be cut.

“Cows aren’t like a tap; you can’t just turn them on or off,” he said.

His warning captures dairy’s particular vulnerability in a tariff war: Milk is highly perishable, collected on a tight schedule and dependent on processors whose demand can change much faster than farmers can adjust production.

“These tariffs are completely unwarranted,” David Wiens, president of the Dairy Farmers of Canada, told Canada’s CBC News, adding that they would affect “the supply chain, not only in Canada but in the US as well”.

Supply-management system

Dairy trade between Canada and the US has largely operated under a free trade agreement between the US, Mexico and Canada, known as CUSMA in Canada.

Canada manages the supply of dairy, poultry and eggs through a national agricultural policy known as supply management. The system uses production quotas and import controls, including tariffs, to provide farmers with more stable and predictable prices while maintaining domestic supply.

Critics describe the system as protectionist and as a government-backed cartel.

Washington argues that Canada’s supply-management system restricts US dairy exports. Trump posted on Truth Social that “Canada had been ripping off the United States of America for years” and accused it of imposing “ridiculously high tariffs” that made life impossible for US farmers.

Canadian producers reject that argument, saying the existing trade agreement already gives US imports substantial tariff-free access that is not fully utilised.

Canada’s dairy trade deficit with the US has grown significantly since CUSMA came into force on July 1, 2020, according to the Dairy Processors Association of Canada.

In 2020, Canada exported 241.3 million Canadian dollars ($173m) in dairy products to the US and imported 647.4 million Canadian dollars ($462.7m) worth of dairy and dairy products. In 2025, Canadian dairy exports had risen to 308.7 million Canadian dollars ($220.7m) while dairy imports from the US had more than doubled to 1.355 billion Canadian dollars ($968.5m), accounting for 13.8 percent of total value of US dairy exports, according to the association.

Bryan Yu, chief economist at Central 1 credit union, said the immediate shock of losing a major market could be difficult for Canadian producers to absorb because replacement buyers cannot be found quickly.

“There is going to be pain in the near term for a lot of our producers,” Yu told Al Jazeera.

“You really can’t quickly adjust to a 50 percent tariff, because it’s uncharted waters for a lot of industries … and ultimately it shuts [Canadian producers] out, because a lot of them don’t have the margins that they can play with,” he said.

Yu said Canadian consumers might absorb some of the additional supply while exporters search for new markets and higher-value products, but neither adjustment is instantaneous.

“There are global markets as well, especially when you talk about chilled, chilled beef, chilled products and really it’s a question of whether … other types of markets that could be available.”

Canada has also imposed retaliatory tariffs, which came into effect on September 8 and cover $20bn worth of US products.

Dairy products are among the targeted goods. The list includes a 50 percent tariff on milk, cream and whey products and a 25 percent tariff on many cheeses imported from the US.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has framed Ottawa’s response as both retaliation and an attempt to build greater economic resilience.

Announcing the collapse of the latest negotiations, he said Canada would match Washington’s new tariffs “dollar for dollar” to protect workers, farmers, families and businesses.

But retaliatory measures carry risks of their own.

“Canada’s new retaliatory tariffs will help some industries but hurt most and weaken economic growth across the country by raising costs for producers and consumers,” Oxford Economics said in a report.

For now, geography remains important for perishable goods like dairy products that once moved quickly across the US border and cannot be redirected overnight to a distant market without new buyers, logistics and regulatory approvals.

Ottawa’s Trade Commissioner Service is advising affected companies to check their CUSMA compliance, explore available relief and contact trade commissioners about potential new markets.

Yu predicted that the US and Canada could reach a tariff deal in the following months but said the interim period could bring “higher prices, weaker economic activity and deeper mistrust”.

For Pruim, the uncertainty is as destabilising as the tariff threat itself.

“I think, like [for] any Canadian, it’s disappointing to have these trade talks collapse again and just the uncertainty around it.”

Intensifying attacks between Saudi Arabia and Yemen’s Houthis have reportedly killed at least five people in total, including three children.

At least one person – a Yemeni resident in Saudi Arabia – was killed, and two others were injured after a Houthi drone was intercepted in Saudi Arabia’s southwestern governorate of Taif on Thursday, according to the kingdom’s civil defence agency.

It is the first death announced in Saudi Arabia this month since Yemen’s Iran-allied Houthis intensified their attacks.

In Yemen on Thursday, the Houthis said “Saudi enemy warplanes targeted three telecommunications towers” in Taiz province.

One civilian was killed in Taiz and another injured in strikes on the town of Abs, Yemen, said Houthi-linked Almasirah television.

Houthi-backed media later reported that “three children were killed and several Yemeni nationals were injured in strikes by the Saudi-backed mercenaries”, a reference to the country’s internationally recognised government forces.

Houthis reject claim they attacked Mecca

The escalation comes as Saudi Arabia said a drone was launched by the Houthis towards Mecca before being intercepted and destroyed.

“It’s a heinous lie,” Houthi leader Abdel-Malik al-Houthi said in a live televised address on Thursday, calling Saudi claims that his group would target Islam’s holiest city “a great propaganda”.

“The sanctity of Mecca is particularly important to the people of Yemen,” he said while accusing Saudi Arabia of “weaponising lies” to serve its war objectives against the Houthis.

Reporting from the Yemeni capital Sanaa, Al Jazeera’s Yousef Mawry said: “Al-Houthi’s speech is not just directed towards the Yemeni people; it is directed to the world to set the record straight that the Houthis did not target the holy city of Mecca, as the Saudis claim.”

In his address, al-Houthi also said Saudi Arabia had initiated the latest round of conflict in Yemen and that Houthi forces are acting defensively.

Meanwhile, Rashad al-Alimi, the head of Yemen’s Saudi-backed Presidential Leadership Council, said that Houthi forces are suffering heavy blows on the fronts in Taiz, Marib, Lahj, al-Jawf, Hajjah, al-Bayda al-Dhale.

In a meeting with the French ambassador to Yemen, al-Alimi said that gains made by the Houthis along the Red Sea coast are temporary, the state-run Saba news agency reported.

Aggression against Mecca ‘a condemned act’

Esmaeil Baghaei, Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, said in a statement on X on Thursday that any aggression against Islamic holy sites, particularly Mecca, “is a condemned act”.

But he added that “a mere claim” of intercepting a drone “en route to Mecca” is not enough to accuse the Houthis of the act.

“Nor should we forget that our region has witnessed numerous instances of ‘false flag’ operations, particularly in recent months,” Baghaei said while pointing at Israel.

Meanwhile, China ⁠has privately asked Iranian officials to help rein in the ⁠Houthis after Saudi Arabia appealed to Beijing following recent Houthi attacks, anonymous sources in Iran told the Reuters news agency.

Beijing publicly called for restraint, dialogue and the restoration of safe navigation, but its private message went further than that, Reuters reported.

The escalation is also threatening to draw in other regional actors – specifically Saudi defence partners Pakistan and Turkiye, which signed a joint defence agreement with the kingdom last month.

Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said the time has come to implement the Mecca agreement with Saudi Arabia and Turkiye due to recent Houthi attacks.

Asif’s comments to Pakistani media on Thursday were made as Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said he’d held a phone conversation with Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir to discuss “regional developments”.

JEDDAH: Saudi-Chinese relations are currently in an excellent phase, according to China’s Consul General in Jeddah, Yang Yi.

Speaking to Al-Eqtisadiah, Yi said this year marks the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the comprehensive strategic partnership between the two countries, adding that bilateral trade reached $100 billion in 2025.

$100 billion in bilateral trade

Yi said China is Saudi Arabia’s largest trading partner, while the Kingdom ranks as China’s largest trading partner in the Middle East.

Bilateral trade amounted to about $50 billion during the first half of this year, with China’s imports from Saudi Arabia exceeding $26 billion during the same period. In contrast, the Kingdom’s imports from China amounted to about $24 billion.

Yi said trade between the two countries is “very balanced,” adding that bilateral trade relations have remained strong despite regional tensions. He also highlighted the growing economic and trade ties between Saudi Arabia and China.

Chinese firms support targets of Saudi Vision 2030

Yi said Chinese companies are actively supporting the implementation of Saudi Vision 2030, noting that China leads among countries contributing to infrastructure and new-energy projects in the Kingdom.

Regarding mutual investments, he estimated that Chinese investment in Saudi Arabia has exceeded $4.26 billion, while Saudi investment in China is also growing, particularly in new energy, advanced technologies and biotechnology.

Saudi investments also include the culture and education sectors, with Yi confirming that the strength of relations and the depth of the partnership are encouraging more Chinese companies to invest in the Saudi market.

At the same time, Saudi companies are showing growing interest in the Chinese market, with the consul general expressing his aspiration for “more prosperous and fruitful” bilateral economic relations in the coming period.

New energy and artificial intelligence

The Chinese official highlighted new areas of Saudi-Chinese cooperation, including new energy, green energy and artificial intelligence, noting that the two countries have held discussions on these areas in recent years.

The leaders of the two countries have also reached important understandings to strengthen cooperation in several areas.

Government entities, companies, and research centers in the two countries are working intensively to develop cooperation.

This aims to consolidate the Saudi-Chinese partnership and enhance cooperation in artificial intelligence and new energy.

China calls for the Strait of Hormuz to remain open

Yi said developments in the Strait of Hormuz are of great importance to countries in the region and the international community, stressing that China attaches great importance to the issue.

He said China supports a political settlement on the issue and called for an immediate ceasefire, adding that keeping the Strait of Hormuz open and free serves the interests of all parties.

He also stressed China’s support for efforts to find a peaceful solution to the issue, saying this would help maintain stability and security in the region while ensuring the continued flow of trade and energy.

The European Union is preparing to use a broader range of economic measures to reduce what European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described as an unsustainable trade deficit with China.

Speaking to the European Parliament on Wednesday, von der Leyen said the imbalance had reached a critical point, with the EU running a goods trade deficit with China equivalent to around €1 billion ($1.15 billion) a day last year.

She warned that Europe was experiencing what she described as a second “China shock”, with growing Chinese industrial exports contributing to pressure on European manufacturing and raising concerns about deindustrialisation.

Europe seeks concrete results

The issue has become a priority in EU China relations as European governments seek to address the growing imbalance through negotiations as well as economic policy tools.

EU leaders asked the European Commission in June to deliver results from its dialogue with Beijing and ensure that the bloc had sufficient instruments to protect its economic interests.

European Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic, who is leading the discussions, has said he wants tangible progress by October.

Von der Leyen said cooperation remained in both sides’ interests but warned that the EU was prepared to move beyond dialogue if negotiations failed to produce results.

“We will use all the tools at our disposal to rebalance our relationship,” she said.

The approach reflects a broader European effort to reduce economic vulnerabilities without completely severing commercial ties with China, one of the EU’s most important trading partners.

Critical minerals add to concerns

Trade is not the only area creating pressure on the relationship. The EU also remains heavily dependent on China for several critical raw materials, including rare earth elements that are essential for industries such as electronics, renewable energy, defense and advanced manufacturing.

Von der Leyen said the EU needed to accelerate efforts to secure supplies and build strategic reserves.

The European Commission plans to establish a European corporation focused on critical raw materials to help the bloc secure and stockpile essential resources.

What’s next

The EU’s approach is likely to combine negotiations with measures aimed at strengthening its own industrial capacity and reducing dependence on Chinese supply chains.

For Beijing, the growing European focus on trade imbalances, industrial competition and critical minerals could create additional pressure to make concessions while preserving access to the European market.

For the EU, however, reducing the deficit will require more than trade restrictions. Europe will also need to expand domestic production, diversify suppliers and address the competitiveness challenges facing its own industries.

The October deadline for trade talks could therefore become an important test of whether Brussels and Beijing can reach practical agreements or whether the EU moves toward a more defensive economic relationship with China.

With information from Reuters.

Published on
14/09/2026 – 16:42 GMT+2

EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič will visit Manila next week to finalise a trade agreement with the Philippines, the European Commission confirmed to Euronews on Monday.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The agreement is nearing conclusion as Brussels has increasingly looked to the Asia-Pacific over the past year to diversify its trade ties.

Since the return to power of US President Donald Trump, the global trade order has been shifting, with the EU seeking new markets for its exports.

The latest round of EU-Philippines trade talks took place in May, with access to public procurement emerging as the final sticking point. An agreement would mark a shift for the Philippines, which has so far kept public contracts closed to foreign bidders.

The Commission told MEPs earlier this month that the rest of the agreement was ready. The aim is to lift trade barriers between both partners in most sectors.

An official from the EU executive also told MEPs that sanitary and phytosanitary rules for food products were “ambitious”, alongside automotive standards that would improve EU manufacturers’ access to the Philippine market. The official added that the EU and the Philippines were “complementary” in both industrial goods and agriculture.

The deal is an important one for Manila, which has been hit by US tariffs in 2025 and by the war in Iran, which heavily impacted energy prices in the country.

However, the Philippines also reached “upper-middle-income country” status in August, granted by the World Bank, which makes it a promising market — “One of the most dynamic economies in the East Asia Pacific region since 2010,” the World Bank said.

Bilateral trade in goods between the EU and the Philippines amounted to €16.8 billion in 2024. That same year, the EU was the Philippines’ fourth-largest trading partner, accounting for 7% of the country’s total trade in goods, while the Philippines was the EU’s 39th-largest trading partner, accounting for 0.3% of the EU’s total trade in goods.

After the Philippines, the Commission aims to conclude talks with Thailand, making 2026 a strong year for EU trade deals across Asia and the Pacific, with agreements already reached with Australia and India.

For all the hysterical outrage that accompanied the announcement of the UK’s measures against illegal Israeli settlements last Tuesday, the world did not end. The reality is that these steps were merely bringing Britain into line with its legal obligation to act against an unlawful occupation and narrow the gaping chasm between the reality on the ground in Palestine and the rhetoric deployed in Westminster.

The reaction of those who support the Israeli settlements — war crimes under the Rome Statute — was frenzied. Anti-Palestinian bodies bellowed outrage. The chief rabbi declared this would be a “dark day for British Jews,” as if somehow they were the target of the measures or the victims of what has been happening. His comments were dangerous as he, along with “establishment” UK Jewish groups like the Board of Deputies of British Jews, blurred the distinction between the actions of the state of Israel and British Jews. This deliberately conflates antisemitism with anti-Israel sentiment.

Others also claimed, with no evidence, that the measures would make British Jews unsafe. The deplorable increase in antisemitic attacks in the UK and elsewhere has never been motivated by British actions against Israel, not least as there has hardly ever been any such action.

In fact, a sizable segment of the British Jewish community welcomed the settlement trade ban or at least accepted it as a reasonable response to the unprecedented building of settlements and frenzy of state-backed Israeli settler violence.

The reaction of those who support the Israeli settlements — war crimes under the Rome Statute — was frenzied

Chris Doyle

The mainstream media coverage was frequently dire. Many columnists depicted British Jews as a victim of the settlement ban. Very few outlets dared suggest that the actions were designed to help Palestinians under threat of ethnic cleansing, forced dispossession and settler pogroms. Once again, the victims were erased from the story.

The other claim was that the US would retaliate against London. This was triggered in large part by the knee-jerk reactions of US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, who posted: “The Brits have lost it. The Jew hate of their government knows no boundaries and knows no facts.” He denies it but he probably did not know Ed Miliband, the foreign secretary, is a British Jew whose parents were refugees from Nazi-occupied Europe. But Huckabee is an extremist maverick, an ardent Zionist who believes in a “Greater Israel.”

Far from retaliating, the US State Department made clear Huckabee’s comments were not authorized. He had been freelancing again. One official said Washington was “staying out of it.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio was far more measured in his comments. He did not even condemn the British actions. President Donald Trump, who is rarely shy of airing any disagreement, has said nothing. In short, the US has taken zero steps. Trump looks increasingly disenchanted with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, not Andy Burnham or Miliband. The president has yet to declare support for Netanyahu ahead of next month’s Israeli elections, as the beleaguered leader hopes.

The settlement lobbies were almost certainly shocked by the 11 countries that joined the UK in confirming they were or would be adopting similar measures. This included France and Canada, meaning three of the G7 states are acting.

Those states yet to adopt the ban have at least condemned the settlements and are not opposing London’s actions

Chris Doyle

Britain was far from isolated, quashing yet another criticism. Those states that have yet to adopt the ban have at least condemned the settlements and are not opposing London’s actions.

In contrast, it is Israel and the US that find themselves once again in a crowd of two. These two states, as they were with the foolhardy war on Iran, align themselves against international law and accountability.

The retaliatory Israeli measures will also hardly dent the British interest. Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar announced the closure of the British Consulate in Jerusalem, the ejection of the British participants in the International Gaza Support Center that oversees aid flows into Gaza and the termination of the British support team that is helping to train the Palestinian Authority.

Note that all these measures hit Palestinians far more than the UK, which is of course the Israeli priority. It means fewer states overseeing aid into Gaza, less support to the PA and, by closing diplomatic premises linked to the Palestinians in Jerusalem, further severs the remaining Palestinian ties to the city.

Expect a raft of settlement announcements shortly. This will be the primary Israeli response to the actions of these dozen states.

Will these measures have an impact? Are they sufficient? Almost certainly not. And the Netanyahu coalition, in election season, will just press the accelerator on the aggression and violence. Other Israeli politicians may get the message: The patience of international actors has finally worn out, albeit decades too late.

These steps should not be belittled. The 12 states have shifted from a declaratory poise to a position of action. For once, the Israeli government is going to have to bear a cost for the occupation that has hitherto not existed.

The message is clear. If Israel behaves like a pariah state, it will start to be treated like a pariah state.

Chris Doyle is director of the London-based Council for Arab-British Understanding (CAABU). He has worked with the council since 1993 after graduating with a first class honors degree in Arabic and Islamic Studies at Exeter University. He has organized and accompanied numerous British parliamentary delegations to Arab countries. Twitter: @Doylech

More from Chris Doyle