trump

China pitches itself as a reliable partner as Trump alienates US allies | International Trade News

China is showcasing itself as a solid business and trading partner to traditional allies of the United States and others who have been alienated by President Donald Trump’s politics, and some of them appear ready for a reset.

Since the start of 2026, Chinese President Xi Jinping has received South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo and Irish leader Micheal Martin.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

This week, United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer is on a three-day visit to Beijing, while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz is expected to visit China for the first time in late February.

Among these visitors, five are treaty allies of the US, but all have been hit over the past year by the Trump administration’s “reciprocal” trade tariffs, as well as additional duties on key exports like steel, aluminium, autos and auto parts.

Canada, Finland, Germany and the UK found themselves in a NATO standoff with Trump this month over his desire to annex Greenland and threats that he would impose additional tariffs on eight European countries he said were standing in his way, including the UK and Finland. Trump has since backed down from this threat.

China’s renewed sales pitch

While China has long sought to present itself as a viable alternative to the post-war US-led international order, its sales pitch took on renewed energy at the World Economic Forum‘s (WEF) annual summit in Davos, Switzerland, earlier this month.

As Trump told world leaders that the US had become “the hottest country, anywhere in the world” thanks to surging investment and tariff revenues, and Europe would “do much better” to follow the US lead, Chinese Vice Premier Li Hefeng’s speech emphasised China’s ongoing support for multilateralism and free trade.

“While economic globalisation is not perfect and may cause some problems, we cannot completely reject it and retreat to self-imposed isolation,” Li said.

“The right approach should be, and can only be, to find solutions together through dialogue.”

Li also criticised the “unilateral acts and trade deals of certain countries” – a reference to Trump’s trade war – that “clearly violate the fundamental principles and principles of the [World Trade Organization] and severely impact the global economic and trade order”.

Li also told the WEF that “every country is entitled to defend its legitimate rights and interests”, a point that could be understood to apply as much to China’s claims over places like Taiwan as to Denmark’s dominion over Greenland.

“In many ways, China has chosen to cast itself in the role of a stable and responsible global actor in the midst of the disruption that we are seeing from the US. Reiterating its support for the United Nations system and global rules has often been quite enough to bolster China’s standing, especially among countries of the Global South,” Bjorn Cappelin, an analyst at the Swedish National China Centre, told Al Jazeera.

The West is listening

John Gong, a professor of economics at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, told Al Jazeera that the recent series of trips by European leaders to China shows that the Global North is listening, too. Other notable signs include the UK’s approval of a Chinese “mega embassy” in London, Gong said, and progress in a years-long trade dispute over Chinese exports of electric vehicles (EVs) to Europe.

Starmer is also expected to pursue more trade and investment deals with Beijing this week, according to UK media.

“A series of events happening in Europe seems to suggest an adjustment of Europe’s China policy – for the better, of course – against the backdrop of what is emanating from Washington against Europe,” Gong told Al Jazeera.

The shifting diplomatic calculations are also clear in Canada, which has shown a renewed willingness to deepen economic ties with China after several spats with Trump over the past year.

Carney’s is the first visit to Beijing by a Canadian prime minister since Justin Trudeau went in 2017, and he came away with a deal that saw Beijing agree to ease tariffs on Canadian agricultural exports and Ottawa to ease tariffs on Chinese EVs.

Trump lashed out at news of the deal, threatening 100 percent trade tariffs on Canada if the deal goes ahead.

In a statement last weekend on his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote that Carney was “sorely mistaken” if he thought Canada could become a “‘Drop Off Port’ for China to send goods and products into the United States”.

The meeting between Carney and Xi this month also thawed years of frosty relations after Canada arrested Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou in late 2018 at the behest of the US. Beijing subsequently arrested two Canadians in a move that was widely seen as retaliation. They were released in 2021 after Meng reached a deferred agreement with prosecutors in New York.

In Davos, Carney told world leaders that there had been a “rupture in the world order” in a clear reference to Trump, followed by remarks this week to the Canadian House of Commons that “almost nothing was normal now” in the US, according to the CBC.

Carney also said this week in a call with Trump that Ottawa should continue to diversify its trade deals with countries beyond the US, although it had no plans in place yet for a free-trade agreement with China.

Carney Beijing
Canadian PM Carney, left, meets President Xi in Beijing, China, on January 16, 2026 [Sean Kilpatrick/Pool via Reuters]

Filling the void

Hanscom Smith, a former US diplomat and senior fellow at Yale’s Jackson School of International Affairs, told Al Jazeera that Beijing’s appeal could be tempered by other factors, however.

“When the United States becomes more transactional, that creates a vacuum, and it’s not clear the extent to which China or Russia, or any other power, is going to be able to fill the void. It’s not necessarily a zero-sum game,” he told Al Jazeera. “Many countries want to have a good relationship with both the United States and China, and don’t want to choose.”

One glaring concern with China, despite its offer of more reliable business dealings, is its massive global trade surplus, which surged to $1.2 trillion last year.

Much of this was gained in the fallout from Trump’s trade war as China’s manufacturers – facing a slew of tariffs from the US and declining demand at home – expanded their supply chains into places like Southeast Asia and found new markets beyond the US.

China’s record trade surplus has alarmed some European leaders, such as French President Emmanuel Macron, who, in Davos, called for more foreign direct investment from China but not its “massive excess capacities and distortive practices” in the form of export dumping.

Li tried to address such concerns head-on in his Davos speech. “We never seek trade surplus; on top of being the world’s factory, we hope to be the world’s market too. However, in many cases, when China wants to buy, others don’t want to sell. Trade issues often become security hurdles,” he said.

Source link

National Enquirer CEO David Pecker, friend of Trump, reportedly granted immunity in hush-money probe

Media outlets are reporting that federal prosecutors have granted immunity to the executive in charge of the National Enquirer amid an investigation into hush-money payments made on behalf of President Trump.

Vanity Fair and the Wall Street Journal, citing anonymous sources, were first to report Wednesday’s development involving David Pecker, CEO of the tabloid’s publisher, American Media Inc., and a longtime friend of the president.

Court papers connected to ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen’s guilty plea Tuesday say Pecker offered to help Trump squash negative stories during the 2016 campaign.

The Journal said Pecker shared details with prosecutors about payments Cohen says Trump directed to buy the silence of two women alleging affairs with him.

Trump’s account has shifted. He said recently he knew about payments “later on.”

Source link

Trump promises to ‘de-escalate’ Minnesota crisis after Alex Pretti shooting | Donald Trump News

US president says he still has confidence in Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem amid calls for her resignation.

US President Donald Trump said his administration intends to “de-escalate” the spiralling crisis in the state of Minnesota after federal agents killed two United States citizens, including intensive care nurse Alex Pretti, who was shot by two Border Patrol officers over the weekend.

“I don’t think it’s a pullback. It’s a little bit of a change,” President Trump told Fox News on Tuesday.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

“We’re going to de-escalate a little bit,” Trump said, referring to a sweeping federal immigration crackdown in Minneapolis that has led to weeks of protests, the killing of Pretti and Renee Good, and a standoff between state and federal officials.

Top Trump officials, including Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, are under fire from Democrats and a growing number of Republicans over how they responded to Pretti’s shooting.

Pretti was filming Border Patrol officers with his phone when he was shot and killed on Saturday.

He was also a licensed gun owner with a permit to carry a weapon in public, which he was wearing at the time of the shooting and which appears to have been confiscated by officers before he was killed.

Trump told Fox News that he still had confidence in Noem despite calls for her resignation.

Noem, who oversees both Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), responded to the killing by accusing Pretti of engaging in “domestic terrorism” and suggested the ICU nurse had brandished his weapon at Border Patrol agents during an altercation.

Noem’s remarks preceded any investigation findings and broke with the longstanding protocols of how US officials discuss a civilian shooting by law enforcement. Her characterisation of events also conflicted with preliminary video evidence showing that Pretti did not take out his weapon at any time while he was tackled and later shot and killed by officers.

A CBP official informed Congress on Tuesday that two federal officers fired shots during the killing of Pretti.

According to a notice sent to Congress, officers tried to take Pretti into custody and he resisted, leading to a struggle. During the struggle, a Border Patrol agent yelled, “He’s got a gun!” multiple times, the official said in the notice, according to The Associated Press news agency.

A Border Patrol officer and a CBP officer each fired Glock pistols, the notice said.

Investigators from CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility conducted the analysis based on a review of body-worn camera footage and agency documentation, the notice said. US law requires the agency to inform relevant congressional committees about deaths in CBP custody within 72 hours.

Source link

Man arrested after spraying unknown substance on Rep. Ilhan Omar

A man sprayed an unknown substance on U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and was tackled to the ground Tuesday during a town hall in Minneapolis, where tensions over federal immigration enforcement have come to a head after agents fatally shot an intensive care nurse and a mother of three this month.

The audience cheered as the man was pinned down and his arms were tied behind his back. In video of the incident, someone in the crowd can be heard saying, “Oh my God, he sprayed something on her.”

Just before that, Omar had called for the abolishment of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to resign or face impeachment. Calls are mounting on Capitol Hill for Noem to step down after the shooting deaths in Minneapolis of two people who protested deportations. Few Republicans have risen to her defense.

“ICE cannot be reformed,” Omar said, seconds before the attack.

Minneapolis police said officers saw the man use a syringe to spray an unknown liquid at Omar. They immediately arrested him and booked him at the county jail for third-degree assault, spokesperson Trevor Folke said. Forensic scientists responded to the scene.

Police identified the man as 55-year-old Anthony Kazmierczak. It was not immediately clear if Kazmierczak had an attorney. The county public defenders’ office could not immediately be reached.

Omar continued the town hall for about 25 more minutes after the man was ushered out by security, saying she would not be intimidated.

There was a strong, vinegar-like smell after the man pushed on the syringe, according to an Associated Press journalist who was there. Photos of the device, which fell to the ground when he was tackled, showed what appeared to be a light brown liquid inside. There was no immediate word from officials on what it was.

Minneapolis City Council member LaTrisha Vetaw said some of the substance came into contact with her and State Sen. Bobby Joe Champion as well. She called it a deeply unsettling experience.

No one in the crowd of about 100 people had a noticeable physical reaction to the substance.

Omar says she is OK and ‘a survivor’

Walking out afterward, Omar said she felt a little flustered but was not hurt. She was going to be screened by a medical team.

She later posted on the social platform X: “I’m ok. I’m a survivor so this small agitator isn’t going to intimidate me from doing my work. I don’t let bullies win.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment Tuesday night.

President Trump has frequently criticized the congresswoman and has stepped up verbal attacks on her in recent months as he turned his focus on Minneapolis. During a Cabinet meeting in December, he called her “garbage.”

Hours earlier on Tuesday, the president criticized Omar as he spoke to a crowd in Iowa, saying his administration would only let in immigrants who “can show that they love our country.”

“They have to be proud, not like Ilhan Omar,” he said, drawing loud boos at the mention of her name.

He added: “She comes from a country that’s a disaster. So probably, it’s considered, I think — it’s not even a country.”

Omar is a U.S. citizen who fled her birthplace, Somalia, with her family at age 8 as a civil war tore apart the country.

The Minneapolis-St. Paul area is home to about 84,000 people of Somali descent — nearly a third of Somalis living in the U.S.

Officials condemn the attack

Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz expressed gratitude that Omar was safe, adding in a post on X: “Our state has been shattered by political violence in the last year. The cruel, inflammatory, dehumanizing rhetoric by our nation’s leaders needs to stop immediately.”

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, also denounced the assault.

“I am deeply disturbed to learn that Rep. Ilhan Omar was attacked at a town hall today” Mace said. “Regardless of how vehemently I disagree with her rhetoric — and I do — no elected official should face physical attacks. This is not who we are.”

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, a Democrat, called the attack “unacceptable.” He said he was relieved that Omar “is OK” and thanked police for their quick response, concluding: “This kind of behavior will not be tolerated in our city.”

The city has been reeling from the fatal shootings of two residents by federal immigration agents this month during Trump’s massive immigration enforcement surge. Intensive care unit nurse Alex Pretti was killed Saturday, less than three weeks after Renee Good was fatally shot behind the wheel of her vehicle.

Lawmakers face rising threats

The attack came days after a man was arrested in Utah for allegedly punching U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost, a Democrat from Florida, in the face during the Sundance Film Festival and saying Trump was going to deport him.

Threats against members of Congress have increased in recent years, peaking in 2021 in the aftermath of that year’s Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, before dipping slightly only to climb again, according to the most recent figures from the U.S. Capitol Police.

Lawmakers have discussed the impact on their ability to hold town halls and public events, with some even citing the threat environment in their decisions not to seek reelection.

Omar has faced the most particular concern, long targeted with harsh language and personal attacks by Trump and other Republicans.

Following the assault on Omar, U.S. Capitol Police said in a statement that the agency was “working with our federal partners to see this man faces the most serious charges possible to deter this kind of violence in our society.”

It also released updated numbers detailing threats to members of Congress: 14,938 “concerning statements, behaviors, and communications directed against lawmakers, their families, staff and the Capitol Complex.”

That is a sharp increase from 2024, when the number of cases was 9,474, according to USCP. It is the third year in a row that the number of threats has increased.

Capitol Police have beefed up security measures across all fronts since Jan. 6, 2021, and the department has seen increased reporting after a new center was launched two years ago to process reports of threats.

Bargfeld and Schoenbaum write for the Associated Press. Schoenbaum reported from Salt Lake City. Associated Press writers Audrey McAvoy in Honolulu, Mike Balsamo, Lisa Mascaro and Michelle Price in Washington, and Farnoush Amiri in New York contributed.

Source link

Trump says US will end support for Iraq if al-Maliki reinstated as PM | Nouri al-Maliki News

Al-Maliki has been nominated by the largest Shia bloc in parliament as its candidate for PM.

President Donald Trump has threatened that the United States will end support for Iraq if Nouri al-Maliki, a former prime minister with ties to the US’s longstanding foe Iran, is reinstated to the post.

Trump, in his latest intervention in another country’s politics, said on Tuesday that Iraq would be making a “very bad choice” with al-Maliki, who just days previously was nominated by the Coordination Framework, the largest Shia bloc in parliament, as its candidate.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“Last time Maliki was in power, the Country descended into poverty and total chaos. That should not be allowed to happen again,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

“Because of his insane policies and ideologies, if elected, the United States of America will no longer help Iraq,” he said.

“If we are not there to help, Iraq has ZERO chance of Success, Prosperity, or Freedom. MAKE IRAQ GREAT AGAIN!”

Trump’s comments are the starkest example yet of the Republican president’s campaign to curb Iran-linked groups’ influence in Iraq, which has long walked a tightrope between its two closest allies, Washington and Tehran.

In a letter, US representatives said that while the selection of the prime minister is an Iraqi decision, “the United States will make its own sovereign decisions regarding the next government in line with American interests”.

As part of Trump’s pressure campaign, Washington has also threatened senior Iraqi politicians with sanctions on the country should armed groups backed by Iran be included in the next government, the Reuters news agency reported last week.

Al-Maliki, 75, is a senior figure in the Shia Islamist Dawa Party. His tenure as prime minister from 2006 to 2014 was a period marked by a power struggle with Sunni and Kurdish rivals and growing tensions with the US.

He stepped down after ISIL (ISIS) seized large parts of the country in 2014, but has remained an influential political player, leading the State of Law coalition and maintaining close ties with Iran-backed factions.

The US wields key leverage over Iraq, as the country’s oil export revenue is largely held at the Federal Reserve Bank in New York in an arrangement reached after the 2003 US invasion that toppled Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

Source link

Families of 2 men killed in boat strike sue Trump administration over attack they call ‘unlawful’

Families of two Trinidadian nationals killed in a Trump administration boat strike last October sued the federal government on Tuesday, calling the attack a war crime and part of an “unprecedented and manifestly unlawful U.S. military campaign.”

The lawsuit is thought to be the first wrongful death case arising from the three dozen strikes that the administration has launched since September on boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean. The complaint will test the legal justification of the Trump administration attacks; government officials have defended them as necessary to stem the flow of drugs into the United States but many legal experts say they amount to a brazen violation of the laws of armed conflict.

The complaint echoes many of the frequently articulated concerns about the boat strikes, noting for instance that they have been carried out without congressional authorization and at a time when there is no military conflict between the United States and drug cartels that under the laws of war could justify the lethal attacks.

“These premeditated and intentional killings lack any plausible legal justification. Thus, they were simply murders, ordered by individuals at the highest levels of government and obeyed by military officers in the chain of command,” the lawsuit says.

The Defense Department said in an email that it does not comment on ongoing litigation.

The lawsuit was filed by the mother of Chad Joseph and the sister of Rishi Samaroo, two Trinidadian nationals who were among six people killed in an October 14 missile strike on a boat traveling from Venezuela to Trinidad. The men were not members of any drug cartel, the lawsuit says, but had instead been fishing in the waters off the Venezuelan coast and were returning to their homes in Trinidad and Tobago.

The two had caught a ride home to Las Cuervas, a fishing community where they were from, on a small boat targeted in a strike announced on Truth Social by President Trump. All six people aboard the boat were killed.

“These killings were wrongful because they took place outside of armed conflict and in circumstances in which Mr. Joseph and Mr. Samaroo were not engaged in activities that presented a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury, and where there were means other than lethal force that could have reasonably been employed to neutralize any such threat,” the lawsuit says.

The death toll from the boat strikes is now up to at least 126 people, with the inclusion of those presumed dead after being lost at sea, the U.S. military confirmed Monday. The figure includes 116 people who were killed immediately in at least 36 attacks carried out since early September, with 10 others believed dead because searchers did not locate them following a strike.

The lawsuit is the first to challenge the legality of the boat strikes in court, according to Jen Nessel, a spokesperson for the Center for Constitutional Rights, which filed the lawsuit in federal court in Massachusetts on behalf of the families, along with the ACLU and others.

Nessel said in an email that the center also has a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking the release of the legal justification for the strikes.

Tucker and Finley write for the Associated Press.

Source link

Minneapolis shooting scrambles 2nd Amendment politics for Trump

Prominent Republicans and gun rights advocates helped elicit a White House turnabout this week after bristling over the administration’s characterization of Alex Pretti, the second person killed this month by a federal officer in Minneapolis, as being responsible for his own death because he lawfully possessed a weapon.

The death produced no clear shifts in U.S. gun politics or policies, even as President Trump shuffles the lieutenants in charge of his militarized immigration crackdown. But important voices in Trump’s coalition have called for a thorough investigation of Pretti’s death while also criticizing inconsistencies in some Republicans’ 2nd Amendment stances.

If the dynamic persists, it could give Republicans problems as Trump heads into a midterm election year with voters already growing skeptical of his overall immigration approach. The concern is acute enough that Trump’s top spokeswoman sought Monday to reassert his brand as a staunch gun rights supporter.

“The president supports the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens, absolutely,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters.

Leavitt qualified that “when you are bearing arms and confronted by law enforcement, you are raising … the risk of force being used against you.”

Videos contradict early statements from administration

That still marked a retreat from the administration’s previous messages about the shooting of Pretti. It came the same day the president dispatched border advisor Tom Homan to Minnesota, seemingly elevating him over Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Border Patrol chief Greg Bovino, who had been in charge in Minneapolis.

Within hours of Pretti’s death on Saturday, Bovino suggested Pretti “wanted to … massacre law enforcement,” and Noem said Pretti was “brandishing” a weapon and acted “violently” toward officers.

“I don’t know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign,” Noem said.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, an architect of Trump’s mass deportation effort, went further on X, declaring Pretti “an assassin.”

Bystander videos contradicted each claim, instead showing Pretti holding a cellphone and helping a woman who had been pepper-sprayed by a federal officer. Within seconds, Pretti was sprayed too and taken to the ground by multiple officers. No video disclosed thus far has shown him unholstering his concealed weapon, which he had a Minnesota permit to carry. It appeared that one officer took Pretti’s gun and walked away with it just before shots began.

As multiple videos went viral online and on television, Vice President JD Vance reposted Miller’s assessment, while Trump shared an alleged photo of “the gunman’s gun, loaded (with two additional full magazines!).”

On Tuesday, Trump was asked whether he agreed with Miller’s comment describing Pretti as an “assassin” and answered “no.” But he added that protesters “can’t have guns” and said he wants the death investigated.

“You can’t walk in with guns, you just can’t,” Trump told reporters on the White House lawn before departing for a trip to Iowa.

Swift reactions from gun rights advocates

The National Rifle Assn., which has backed Trump three times, released a statement that began by casting blame on Minnesota Democrats it accused of stoking protests. But the group lashed out after a federal prosecutor in California said on X, “If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you.”

That analysis, the NRA said, is “dangerous and wrong.”

FBI Director Kash Patel magnified the blowback Sunday on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo.” No one, Patel said, can “bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It’s that simple.”

Erich Pratt, vice president of Gun Owners of America, was incredulous.

“I have attended protest rallies while armed, and no one got injured,” he said on CNN.

Conservative officials around the country made the same connection between the 1st and 2nd amendments.

“Showing up at a protest is very American. Showing up with a weapon is very American,” state Rep. Jeremy Faison, who leads the GOP caucus in Tennessee, said on X.

Trump’s first-term vice president, Mike Pence, called for a “full and transparent investigation of this officer involved shooting.”

A different response from the past

Liberals, conservatives and nonpartisan experts noted how the administration’s response differed from past conservative positions involving protests and weapons.

Multiple Trump supporters were found to have weapons during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Trump issued blanket pardons to all of them.

Republicans were critical in 2020 when Mark and Patricia McCloskey had to pay fines after pointing guns at protesters who marched through their St. Louis neighborhood after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. And then there’s Kyle Rittenhouse, a counterprotester acquitted after fatally shooting two men and injuring a third in Kenosha, Wis., during the post-Floyd protests.

“You remember Kyle Rittenhouse and how he was made a hero on the right,” Trey Gowdy, a Republican former congressman and attorney for Trump during one of his first-term impeachments. “Alex Pretti’s firearm was being lawfully carried. … He never brandished it.”

Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor who has studied the history of the gun debate, said the fallout “shows how tribal we’ve become.” Republicans spent years talking about the 2nd Amendment as a means to fight government tyranny, he said.

“The moment someone who’s thought to be from the left, they abandon that principled stance,” Winkler said.

Meanwhile, Democrats who have criticized open and concealed carry laws for years, Winkler added, are not amplifying that position after Pretti’s death.

Uncertain effects in an election year

The blowback against the administration from core Trump supporters comes as Republicans are trying to protect their threadbare majority in the U.S. House and face several competitive Senate races.

Perhaps reflecting the stakes, GOP staff and campaign aides were hesitant Monday to talk about the issue at all.

The House Republican campaign chairman, Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina, is sponsoring the GOP’s most significant gun legislation of this congressional term, a proposal to make state concealed-carry permits reciprocal across all states.

The bill cleared the House Judiciary Committee in the fall. Asked Monday whether Pretti’s death and the Minneapolis protests might affect debate, an aide to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) did not offer any update on the bill’s prospects.

Gun rights advocates have notched many legislative victories in Republican-controlled statehouses in recent decades, including rolling back gun-free zones around schools and churches and expanding gun possession rights in schools, on university campuses and in other public spaces.

William Sack, legal director of the Second Amendment Foundation, said he was surprised and disappointed by the administration’s initial statements after the Pretti shooting. Trump’s vacillating, he said, is “very likely to cost them dearly with the core of a constituency they count on.”

Barrow and Riccardi write for the Associated Press. AP writers Josh Boak in Washington and Kimberlee Kruesi in Providence, R.I., contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump’s use of AI images pushes new boundaries, further eroding public trust, experts say

The Trump administration has not shied away from sharing AI-generated imagery online, embracing cartoonlike visuals and memes and promoting them on official White House channels.

But an edited — and realistic — image of civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong in tears after being arrested is raising new alarms about how the administration is blurring the lines between what is real and what is fake.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s account posted the original image from Levy Armstrong’s arrest before the official White House account posted an altered image that showed her crying. The doctored picture is part of a deluge of AI-edited imagery that has been shared across the political spectrum since the fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti by U.S. Border Patrol officers in Minneapolis

However, the White House’s use of artificial intelligence has troubled misinformation experts who fear the spreading of AI-generated or AI-edited images erodes public perception of the truth and sows distrust.

In response to criticism of the edited image of Levy Armstrong, White House officials doubled down on the post, with Deputy Communications Director Kaelan Dorr writing on X that the “memes will continue.” White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson also shared a post mocking the criticism.

David Rand, a professor of information science at Cornell University, says calling the altered image a meme “certainly seems like an attempt to cast it as a joke or humorous post, like their prior cartoons. This presumably aims to shield them from criticism for posting manipulated media.” He said the purpose of sharing the altered arrest image seems “much more ambiguous” than the cartoonish images the administration has shared in the past.

Memes have always carried layered messages that are funny or informative to people who understand them, but indecipherable to outsiders. AI-enhanced or AI-edited imagery is just the latest tool the White House uses to engage the segment of Trump’s base that spends a lot of time online, said Zach Henry, a Republican communications consultant who founded Total Virality, an influencer marketing firm.

“People who are terminally online will see it and instantly recognize it as a meme,” he said. “Your grandparents may see it and not understand the meme, but because it looks real, it leads them to ask their kids or grandkids about it.”

All the better if it prompts a fierce reaction, which helps it go viral, said Henry, who generally praised the work of the White House’s social media team.

The creation and dissemination of altered images, especially when they are shared by credible sources, “crystallizes an idea of what’s happening, instead of showing what is actually happening,” said Michael A. Spikes, a professor at Northwestern University and news media literacy researcher.

“The government should be a place where you can trust the information, where you can say it’s accurate, because they have a responsibility to do so,” he said. “By sharing this kind of content, and creating this kind of content … it is eroding the trust — even though I’m always kind of skeptical of the term trust — but the trust we should have in our federal government to give us accurate, verified information. It’s a real loss, and it really worries me a lot.”

Spikes said he already sees the “institutional crises” around distrust in news organizations and higher education, and feels this behavior from official channels inflames those issues.

Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor at UCLA and the host of the “Utopias” podcast, said many people are now questioning where they can turn to for “trustable information.” “AI systems are only going to exacerbate, amplify and accelerate these problems of an absence of trust, an absence of even understanding what might be considered reality or truth or evidence,” he said.

Srinivasan said he feels the White House and other officials sharing AI-generated content not only invites everyday people to continue to post similar content but also grants permission to others who are in positions of credibility and power, such as policymakers, to share unlabeled synthetic content. He added that given that social media platforms tend to “algorithmically privilege” extreme and conspiratorial content — which AI generation tools can create with ease — “we’ve got a big, big set of challenges on our hands.”

An influx of AI-generated videos related to Immigration and Customs Enforcement action, protests and interactions with citizens has already been proliferating on social media. After Good was shot by an ICE officer while she was in her car, several AI-generated videos began circulating of women driving away from ICE officers who told them to stop. There are also many fabricated videos circulating of immigration raids and of people confronting ICE officers, often yelling at them or throwing food in their faces.

Jeremy Carrasco, a content creator who specializes in media literacy and debunking viral AI videos, said the bulk of these videos are likely coming from accounts that are “engagement farming,” or looking to capitalize on clicks by generating content with popular keywords and search terms such as ICE. But he also said the videos are getting views from people who oppose ICE and DHS and could be watching them as “fan fiction,” or engaging in “wishful thinking,” hoping that they’re seeing real pushback against the organizations and their officers.

Still, Carrasco also believes that most viewers can’t tell if what they’re watching is fake, and questions whether they would know “what’s real or not when it actually matters, like when the stakes are a lot higher.”

Even when there are blatant signs of AI generation, like street signs with gibberish on them or other obvious errors, only in the “best-case scenario” would a viewer be savvy enough or be paying enough attention to register the use of AI.

This issue is, of course, not limited to news surrounding immigration enforcement and protests. Fabricated and misrepresented images following the capture of deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro exploded online earlier this month. Experts, including Carrasco, think the spread of AI-generated political content will only become more commonplace.

Carrasco believes that the widespread implementation of a watermarking system that embeds information about the origin of a piece of media into its metadata layer could be a step toward a solution. The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity has developed such a system, but Carrasco doesn’t think that will become extensively adopted for at least another year.

“It’s going to be an issue forever now,” he said. I don’t think people understand how bad this is.”

Huamani writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Jonathan J. Cooper in Phoenix and Barbara Ortutay in San Francisco contributed to this report.



Source link

Trump visits Iowa trying to focus on affordability during fallout over nurse’s Minneapolis shooting

President Trump is headed to Iowa on Tuesday as part of the White House’s midterm year pivot toward affordability, even as his administration remains mired in the fallout in Minneapolis over a second fatal shooting by federal immigration officers this month.

While in Iowa, the Republican president will make a stop at a local business and then deliver a speech on affordability, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. The remarks will be at the Horizon Events Center in Clive, a suburb of Des Moines.

The trip is expected to also highlight energy policy, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles said last week. It’s part of the White House’s strategy to have Trump travel out of Washington once a week ahead of the midterm elections to focus on affordability issues facing everyday Americans — an effort that keeps getting diverted by crisis.

The latest comes as the Trump administration is grappling with the weekend shooting death of Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse killed by federal agents in the neighboring state of Minnesota. Pretti had participated in protests following the Jan. 7 killing of Renee Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer. Even as some top administration officials moved quickly to malign Pretti, the White House said Monday that Trump was waiting until an investigation into the shooting was complete.

Trump calls Pretti killing ‘sad situation’

As Trump left the White House on Tuesday to head to Iowa, he was repeatedly questioned by reporters about Pretti’s killing. Trump disputed language used by his own deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, who on social media described Pretti as an “assassin” who “tried to murder federal agents.” Vice President JD Vance shared the post.

Trump, when asked Tuesday if he believed Pretti was an assassin, said, “No.”

When asked if he thought Pretti’s killing was justified, Trump called it “a very sad situation” and said a “big investigation” was underway.

“I’m going to be watching over it, and I want a very honorable and honest investigation. I have to see it myself,” he said.

He also said Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who was quick to cast Pretti as a violent instigator, would not be resigning.

Republicans want to switch the subject to affordability

Trump was last in Iowa ahead of the July 4 holiday to kick off the United States’ upcoming 250th anniversary, which morphed largely into a celebration of his major spending and tax cut package hours after Congress had approved it.

Republicans are hoping that Trump’s visit to the state on Tuesday draws focus back to that tax bill, which will be a key part of their pitch as they ask voters to keep them in power in November.

“I invited President Trump back to Iowa to highlight the real progress we’ve made: delivering tax relief for working families, securing the border, and growing our economy,” Rep. Zach Nunn, R-Iowa, said in a statement in advance of his trip. “Now we’ve got to keep that momentum going and pass my affordable housing bill, deliver for Iowa’s energy producers, and bring down costs for working families.”

Trump’s affordability tour has taken him to Michigan, Pennsylvania and North Carolina as the White House tries to marshal the president’s political power to appeal to voters in key swing states.

But Trump’s penchant for going off-script has sometimes taken the focus off cost-of-living issues and his administration’s plans for how to combat it. In Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania, Trump insisted that inflation was no longer a problem and that Democrats were using the term affordability as a “hoax” to hurt him. At that event, Trump also griped that immigrants arriving to the U.S. from “filthy” countries got more attention than his pledges to fight inflation.

Competitive races in Iowa

Although it was a swing state just a little more than a decade ago, Iowa in recent years has been reliably Republican in national and statewide elections. Trump won Iowa by 13 percentage points in 2024 against Democrat Kamala Harris.

Still, two of Iowa’s four congressional districts have been among the most competitive in the country and are expected to be again in this year’s midterm elections. Trump already has endorsed Republican Reps. Nunn and Mariannette Miller-Meeks. Democrats, who landed three of Iowa’s four House seats in the 2018 midterm elections during Trump’s first term, see a prime opportunity to unseat Iowa incumbents.

This election will be the first since 1968 with open seats for both governor and U.S. senator at the top of the ticket after Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds and Republican U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst opted out of reelection bids. The political shake-ups have rippled throughout the state, with Republican Reps. Randy Feenstra and Ashley Hinson seeking new offices for governor and for U.S. senator, respectively.

Democrats hope Rob Sand, the lone Democrat in statewide office who is running for governor, will make the entire state more competitive with his appeal to moderate and conservative voters and his $13 million in cash on hand.

Kim and Fingerhut write for the Associated Press. Kim reported from Washington. AP writer Michelle L. Price in Washington contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump signs executive order to ‘preempt’ permitting process for fire-destroyed homes in L.A.

President Donald Trump has announced an executive order to allow victims of the Los Angeles wildfires to rebuild without dealing with “unnecessary, dupicative, or obstructive” permitting requirements.

The order, which is likely to be challenged by the city and state, claimed that local governments have failed to adequately process permits and were slowing down residents who are desperate to rebuild in the Palisades and Altadena.

“American families and small businesses affected by the wildfires have been forced to continue living in a nightmare of delay, uncertainty, and bureaucratic malaise as they remain displaced from their homes, often without a source of income, while state and local governments delay or prevent reconstruction by approving only a fraction of the permits needed to rebuild,” Trump wrote in the executive order, which he signed Friday.

The order called on the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to “preempt” state and local permitting authorities.

Instead of going through the usual approval process, residents using federal emergency funds to rebuild would need to self-certify to federal authorities that they have complied with local health and safety standards.

The order comes as the city and county approach 3,000 permits issued for rebuilding. A December review by The Times found that the permitting process in Altadena and Pacific Palisades was moving at a moderate rate compared to other major fires in California. As of Dec. 14, the county had issued rebuilding permits for about 16% of the homes destroyed in the Eaton fire and the city had issued just under 14% for those destroyed in the Palisades fire.

While Mayor Karen Bass did not immediately provide comment, the executive order drew intense pushback from Gov. Gavin Newsom.

A spokesperson for Newsom, Tara Gallegos, called Trump a “clueless idiot” for believing the federal government could issue local rebuilding permits.

“With 1625+ home permits issued, hundreds of homes under construction, and permitting timelines at least 2x faster than before the fires, an executive order to rebuild Mars would do just as useful,” Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote in a post on X, citing the number of permits issued solely by the city of Los Angeles.

Newsom said that the federal government needed to release funding, not take over control of the permitting process. The governor said that what communities really lack is money, not permits.

“Please actually help us. We are begging you,” Newsom wrote.

Instead of descending into the permitting process, Newsom called on the president to send a recovery package to congress to help families rebuild, citing a letter from a bipartisan delegation of California legislators that called for federal funding.

“As the recovery process continues, additional federal support is needed, and our entire delegation looks forward to working cooperatively with your administration to ensure the communities of Southern California receive their fair share of federal disaster assistance,” wrote the California legislators on Jan 7.

Some in the Palisades agreed that money was a bigger issue than permitting.

“When I talk to people it seems to have more to do with their insurance payout or whether they have enough money to complete construction,” said Maryam Zar, a Palisades resident who runs the Palisades Recovery Coalition.

Zar called the executive order “interesting” and said that it was fair of the president to call the recovery pace slow and unacceptable.

Source link

Trump’s immigration crackdown led to drop in U.S. growth rate last year as population hit 342 million

President Trump’s crackdown on immigration contributed to a year-to-year drop in the nation’s growth rate as the U.S. population reached nealry 342 million people in 2025, according to population estimates released Tuesday by the U.S. Census Bureau.

The 0.5% growth rate for 2025 was a sharp drop from 2024’s almost 1% growth rate, which was the highest since 2001 and was fueled by immigration. The 2024 estimates put the U.S. population at 340 million people.

Immigration increased by 1.3 million people last year, compared with 2024’s increase of 2.8 million people. The census report did not distinguish between legal and illegal immigration.

In the past 125 years, the lowest growth rate was in 2021, during the height of the coronavirus pandemic, when the U.S. population grew by just 0.16%, or 522,000 people, and immigration increased by just 376,000 people because of travel restrictions into the U.S. Before that, the lowest growth rate was just under 0.5% in 1919 at the height of the Spanish flu.

Tuesday’s data release comes as researchers have been trying to determine the effects of the second Trump administration’s immigration crackdown after the Republican president returned to the White House in January 2025. Trump made the surge of migrants at the southern border a central issue in his winning 2024 presidential campaign.

The numbers made public Tuesday reflect change from July 2024 to July 2025, covering the end of President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration and the first half of Trump’s first year back in office.

The figures capture a period that reflects the beginning of enforcement surges in Los Angeles and Portland, Ore., but do not capture the impact on immigration after the Trump administration’s crackdowns began in Chicago; New Orleans; Memphis, Tenn.; and Minneapolis, Minn..

The 2025 numbers were a jarring divergence from 2024, when net international migration accounted for 84% of the nation’s 3.3 million-person increase from the year before. The jump in immigration two years ago was partly because of a new method of counting that added people who were admitted for humanitarian reasons.

“They do reflect recent trends we have seen in out-migration, where the numbers of people coming in is down and the numbers going out is up,” Eric Jensen, a senior research scientist at the Census Bureau, said last week.

Unlike the once-a-decade census, which determines how many congressional seats and Electoral College votes each state gets, as well as the distribution of $2.8 trillion in annual government funding, the population estimates are calculated from government records and internal Census Bureau data.

The release of the 2025 population estimates was delayed by the federal government shutdown last fall and comes at a challenging time for the Census Bureau and other U.S. statistical agencies. The bureau, which is the largest statistical agency in the U.S., lost about 15% of its workforce last year due to buyouts and layoffs that were part of cost-cutting efforts by the White House and its Department of Government Efficiency.

Other recent actions by the Trump administration, such as the firing of Erika McEntarfer as Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner, have raised concerns about political meddling at U.S. statistical agencies. But Brookings demographer William Frey said the bureau’s staffers appear to have been “doing this work as usual without interference.”

“So I have no reason to doubt the numbers that come out,” Frey said.

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

How ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ became code for insulting Joe Biden

When Republican Rep. Bill Posey of Florida ended an Oct. 21 House floor speech with a fist pump and the phrase “Let’s go, Brandon!” it may have seemed cryptic and weird to many who were listening. But the phrase was already growing in right-wing circles, and now the seemingly upbeat sentiment — actually a stand-in for swearing at Joe Biden — is everywhere.

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) wore a “Let’s Go Brandon” face mask at the Capitol last week. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) posed with a “Let’s Go Brandon” sign at the World Series. Sen. Mitch McConnell’s press secretary retweeted a photo of the phrase on a construction sign in Virginia.

The line has become conservative code for something far more vulgar: “F— Joe Biden.” It’s all the rage among Republicans wanting to prove their conservative credentials, a not-so-secret handshake that signals they’re in sync with the party’s base.

Americans are accustomed to their leaders being publicly jeered, and former President Trump’s often-coarse language seemed to expand the boundaries of what counts as normal political speech.

But how did Republicans settle on the Brandon phrase as a G-rated substitute for its more vulgar three-word cousin?

It started at an Oct. 2 NASCAR race at the Talladega Superspeedway in Alabama. Brandon Brown, a 28-year-old driver, had won his first Xfinity Series and was being interviewed by an NBC Sports reporter. The crowd behind him was chanting something at first difficult to make out. The reporter suggested they were chanting “Let’s go Brandon” to cheer the driver. But it became increasingly clear they were saying: “F— Joe Biden.”

NASCAR and NBC have since taken steps to limit “ambient crowd noise” during interviews, but it was too late — the phrase already had taken off.

When the president visited a construction site in suburban Chicago a few weeks ago to promote his vaccinate-or-test mandate, protesters deployed both three-word phrases. This past week, Biden’s motorcade was driving past a “Let’s Go Brandon” banner as the president passed through Plainfield, N.J.

And a group chanted “Let’s go Brandon” outside a Virginia park Monday when Biden made an appearance on behalf of the Democratic candidate for governor, Terry McAuliffe. Two protesters dropped the euphemism entirely, holding up hand-drawn signs with the profanity.

Friday morning on a Southwest flight from Houston to Albuquerque, the pilot signed off his greeting over the public address system with the phrase, to audible gasps from some passengers.

Veteran GOP ad maker Jim Innocenzi had no qualms about the coded crudity, calling it “hilarious.”

“Unless you are living in a cave, you know what it means,” he said. “But it’s done with a little bit of a class. And if you object and are taking it too seriously, go away.”

America’s presidents have endured meanness for centuries; Grover Cleveland faced chants of “Ma, Ma Where’s my Pa?” in the 1880s over rumors he’d fathered an illegitimate child. Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson were the subject of poems that leaned into racist tropes and allegations of bigamy.

“We have a sense of the dignity of the office of president that has consistently been violated to our horror over the course of American history,” said Cal Jillson, a politics expert and professor in the political science department at Southern Methodist University. “We never fail to be horrified by some new outrage.”

There were plenty of old outrages.

“F— Trump” graffiti still marks many an overpass in Washington, D.C. George W. Bush had a shoe thrown at his face. Bill Clinton was criticized with such fervor that his most vocal critics were labeled the “Clinton crazies.”

The biggest difference, though, between the sentiments hurled at the Grover Clevelands of yore and modern politicians is the amplification they get on social media.

“Before the expansion of social media a few years ago, there wasn’t an easily accessible public forum to shout your nastiest and darkest public opinions,” said Matthew Delmont, a history professor at Dartmouth College.

Even the racism and vitriol to which former President Obama was subjected was tempered in part because Twitter was relatively new. There was no TikTok. As for Facebook, leaked company documents have recently revealed how the platform increasingly ignored hate speech and misinformation and allowed it to proliferate.

A portion of the U.S. was already angry before the Brandon moment, believing the 2020 presidential election was rigged despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary, which has stood the test of recounts and court cases. But now it’s more than that to die-hard Trump supporters, said Stanley Renshon, a political scientist and psychoanalyst at the City University of New York.

He cited the Afghanistan withdrawal, the Southern border situation and rancorous school board debates as situations in which Biden critics feel that “how American institutions are telling the American public what they clearly see and understand to be true, is in fact not true.”

Trump hasn’t missed the moment. His Save America PAC now sells a $45 T-shirt featuring “Let’s go Brandon” above an American flag. One message to supporters reads, “#FJB or LET’S GO BRANDON? Either way, President Trump wants YOU to have our ICONIC new shirt.”

Separately, T-shirts are popping up in storefronts with the slogan and the NASCAR logo.

And as for the real Brandon, thing haven’t been so great. He drives for a short-staffed, underfunded team owned by his father. And while that win — his first career victory — was huge for him, the team has long struggled for sponsorship and existing partners have not been marketing the driver since the slogan.

Source link

Minnesota’s Fortune 500 companies speak out on ICE, not loudly enough

Here are a couple of points about the business community of Minnesota you may not have known.

First, it’s home to a surprisingly large cadre of 17 major corporations, members of Fortune’s roster of the 500 largest U.S. companies.

Some of America’s best-known consumer companies, including UnitedHealth Group, Target, Best Buy, 3M and General Mills have chosen the windy, cold and snowy — but heretofore tranquil — state for their headquarters.

To get all 60 of the major CEOs to sign onto a statement was a remarkable feat.

— Bill George, former Minnesota corporate executive

Second, this collection of elite businesses largely has been silent about the federal government’s assault on the people of Minneapolis, which has been going on since the beginning of December. The silence ended Sunday, when 60 Minnesota businesses issued a joint statement through the state Chamber of Commerce calling for “an immediate deescalation of tensions.”

That so many businesses came together for the statement was an achievement, given the customary reluctance of corporate leaders to address incendiary political issues. But in terms of its actual content, the statement was pretty thin gruel, bristling with public relations-style circumlocution and vagueness.

Get the latest from Michael Hiltzik

If anything, the Minnesota statement underscores the quandary facing American corporations in the Age of Trump, when the president viciously and publicly attacks anyone he deems to be a personal adversary. For a business, that can translate into a threat to the top and bottom lines.

Business leaders faced with a choice between going along with Trump, or poking him with a stick, almost invariably have chosen the first path.

That Minnesota’s businesses even went as far as they did does suggests the tide may have turned on challenges to Trump’s policies. Even so, we’re still standing only on the edge of the water.

The refusal of the American business community to take a strong stand against Trump’s policies has been a long-lasting scandal.

“This shows the greatest cowardice in the history of the Business Roundtable,” says Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, the Yale School of Management’s expert in corporate leadership, referring to the organization of corporate chief executives that should carry the flag of backlash against Trump’s actions.

I asked the Roundtable to comment on the chaos in Minneapolis. It replied with a statement from CEO Joshua Bolten, a former White House aide to George W. Bush, endorsing the Minnesota Chamber’s call for “cooperation between state, local, and federal authorities to immediately de-escalate the situation in Minneapolis.”

Is that sufficient?

What’s needed is for leaders to name names and demand concrete steps, at least as long as our political leaders remain missing in action. In Minnesota — indeed, wherever Trump policies trample norms and values — the situation has become a moral crisis for all American society, including the commercial.

That said, it isn’t surprising that Minnesota’s big corporations, like almost all American corporations, have been gun-shy about confronting a political issue like this head-on. They can properly feel that they’ve been burned before.

Target, the second-largest public corporation headquartered in the state (after UnitedHealth), experienced a front-page blowback from political controversies twice in recent years.

In 2023, as I reported then, the company capitulated when a braying mob of anti-LGBTQ+ reactionaries targeted it for displaying Pride-themed merchandise in its stores during June’s Pride Month observances.

Target, which had proudly displayed such merchandise in previous years, told personnel in many stores to shrink or even eliminate their Pride-themed merchandise displays or move them to less conspicuous sections of the stores. Some LGBTQ+ designers discovered that their products had been taken off the shelves.

Last year, only days after Trump launched his second term with a flurry of antidiversity executive orders, Target announced it was “concluding our three-year diversity, equity and inclusion goals.” The company also withdrew from “all external diversity-focused surveys,” including a widely followed Corporate Equality index sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign, which tracks corporate policies on LGBTQ+ rights and inclusion.

The backtracking backfired. Target’s sales cratered, in part because consumers were angry about its DEI reversals. During a conference call with Wall Street analysts following its first-quarter earnings report, CEO Brian Cornell attributed the company’s ugly performance to factors including “the reaction to the updates we shared … in January,” an allusion to its ending of DEI initiatives.

The escalating crisis in Minneapolis seems to have been the trigger for the state’s business leaders to issue their joint statement. “To get all 60 of the major CEOs to sign onto a statement was a remarkable feat,” says Bill George, a former CEO of Minneapolis-based medical device maker Medtronic and a former Target board member.

“Maybe some people wanted it to be stronger,” George told me, “but I believe a statement signed by every Minnesota CEO of size represents a turning point in the whole discussion between the federal government and the state government.” He hoped that it would be enough to prompt Trump to simply “declare victory” in Minnesota and “move on to other challenges.”

Still, the text of the Minnesota chamber’s communique illustrates that corporate America still is reluctant to confront Trump directly.

The statement refers, vaguely, to “the recent challenges facing our state,” which “created widespread disruption and tragic loss of life.”

In other words, the statement alludes to something having happened, but doesn’t identify who did it or even what it was. A “tragic loss of life,” after all, can befall people slipping on the ice and cracking their head, as well as someone being shot 10 times in an unprovoked attack.

The statement asserts that “for the past several weeks, representatives of Minnesota’s business community have been working every day behind the scenes with federal, state and local officials to advance real solutions. These efforts have included close communication with the Governor, the White House, the Vice President and local mayors. There are ways for us to come together to foster progress.”

It calls for “an immediate deescalation [sic] of tensions and for state, local and federal officials to work together to find real solutions.”

Lacking are specifics. What “real solutions” are on the table in these “close communications” with public officials? Who is in on these behind-the-scenes conversations? What actions would bring about “an immediate deescalation of tensions”?

I asked the Chamber of Commerce to answer those questions, but a spokesman told me the statement would have to stand by itself.

The statement doesn’t even mention Renee Good and Alex Pretti, whose killing finally provoked the Chamber’s members to speak out. Nor does it address the unmistakable discrepancies between how the Trump administration described the killings and their victims, and what millions of people can see in videos.

What’s infuriating is that for many Americans — including, notably, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey — the solution to this crisis is crystal clear: Get ICE and the Border Patrol out of Minneapolis neighborhoods. That even occurred to the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, which on Sunday advised Trump to “pause ICE enforcement in the Twin Cities to ease tensions and consider a less provocative strategy.”

One might have thought that Minnesota companies would be among the leaders pushing back against Trump policies, especially those unfolding in their front yards.

“Minnesota in general has been the hotbed of traditional progressive politics,” Sonnenfeld says. “The Minnesota business community was always the paragon of social investment — very philanthropic and socially responsible — and had soaring performance to show for it. Minneapolis was always the model showing that doing good is not antithetical to doing well.”

Minnesota business leaders clearly were becoming concerned that Trump’s anti-immigrant surge threatened their ability to do well.

“This situation is very harmful to their businesses,” George says. “It’s extremely important that their employees feel that they are safe and secure in their place of work, and that their corporate leaders have their back.”

Some Minnesota companies feared Trump’s immigration crackdown could make it harder to recruit executives.

“If this drags on, it will have a devastating effect on Minnesota companies’ ability to attract people from around the world,” George told me. “They depend upon bringing executives in from New York and L.A., but also from China, Japan and Europe. This situation is really a deterrent to that.”

Whether Minnesota’s corporate pushback will move the needle on Trump’s policy isn’t clear, though there are faint signs that he recognizes he isn’t winning fans on the issue.

On Monday he assigned his border czar, Tom Homan, to take charge of the Minnesota surge — not that Homan has the reputation of a peacemaker on immigration issues.

According to Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino, up to now the face of the surge, the agents involved in Saturday’s killing, including the two known to have fired gunshots at Pretti, are still on the job, though he said they were transferred out of Minneapolis “for their safety.” (There were reports Monday that Bovino is being sent out of Minnesota and back to his prior post in California.)

Nor are there signs that the surge is over. ICE and the Border Patrol are still on the streets of Minneapolis, so further mayhem is possible.

Source link

Trump raises US tariffs on South Korea imports to 25%

US President Donald Trump has announced he is raising tariffs on South Korean imports to 25% after accusing Seoul of “not living up” to a trade deal reached last year.

In a post on social media, Trump said he would increase levies on South Korea from 15% across a range of products including automobiles, lumber, pharmaceuticals and “all other Reciprocal TARIFFS”.

Trump said South Korean lawmakers have been slow to approve the deal while “we have acted swiftly to reduce our TARIFFS in line with the Transaction agreed to”.

South Korea says it had not been given official notice of the decision to raise tariffs on some of its goods, and wanted urgent talks with Washington over the issue.

It added that South Korea’s Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan, who is currently in Canada, will visit Washington as soon as possible to meet US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.

South Korea’s benchmark Kospi stock index fell on Tuesday morning but was trading about 1.8% higher later in the day as shares in major exporters recovered.

Seoul and Washington reached a deal last October, which included a pledge from South Korea to invest $350bn (£256bn) in the US, some of which would go to shipbuilding.

The following month, the two countries agreed that the US would reduce tariffs on some products once South Korea started the process to approve the deal.

The agreement was submitted to South Korea’s National Assembly on 26 November and is currently being reviewed. It is likely to be passed in February, according to local media.

Tariffs are paid by companies who import products. In this case, US firms will pay a 25% tax on goods they buy from South Korea.

Trump has frequently used tariffs as leverage to enact foreign policy during his second term in the White House.

On Saturday, he threatened Canada with a 100% tariff if it struck a trade deal with China.

On Monday, Chinese officials said its “strategic partnership” agreement with Canada is not meant to undercut other countries.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has said his country was not pursuing a free trade deal with China and has “never” considered it.

He added that Canadian officials have made their position clear to their American counterparts.

Before that, Trump said he would impose import taxes on eight countries – including the UK – who opposed US plans to seize Greenland, an autonomous territory in the Kingdom of Denmark which is a member of Nato.

He later backed down from the tariff threat over Greenland citing progress towards a “future deal” over the island, but the episode strained US relations with Denmark and other Nato allies.

Source link

Lula, Trump discuss ‘Board of Peace’, agree to meet in Washington: Brazil | Donald Trump News

Brazil’s President Lula criticises US actions in Venezuela, calling the capture of Maduro an unacceptable line against regional stability.

‍Brazilian ‍President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has held a ⁠phone call ​with his US ‍counterpart Donald Trump and agreed ‍to ⁠visit Washington soon, the Brazilian government said in a statement.

The two leaders on Monday discussed several issues during the 50-minute call, including the situation in Venezuela, Trump’s proposed “Board of Peace” for Gaza, and the fight against organised crime.

“Lula and Trump ​exchanged ‌views on the situation in Venezuela, and the ‌Brazilian president stressed ‌the importance of ⁠preserving peace and stability in the region,” ‌the statement said.

Regarding Venezuela, the Brazilian president stressed the importance of “preserving peace and stability in the region”, the statement said.

Lula has criticised the ‍US abduction of ⁠Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who was deposed earlier this month and taken to New York to face drug-trafficking charges. The Brazilian president had condemned the move as crossing “an unacceptable line”.

Lula emphasised to Trump on Monday the need to work for the welfare of ​the Venezuelan people.

The Brazilian government’s statement did not say whether Lula accepted Trump’s ‍invitation to join the initiative.

Board of Peace

Lula also ‌requested that Trump’s new proposal for a Board of Peace “be limited to the issue of Gaza and include a seat for Palestine”, as global powers worry the initiative launched last ‌Thursday could assume a wider role and rival the United Nations.

Lula also urged the “comprehensive reform of the United Nations, including the expansion of the permanent members of the Security Council”.

On Friday, Lula, 80, accused Trump, 79, of trying to create “a new UN where only he is the owner”, with his proposed “Board of Peace” following the October 10 ceasefire in the Israel-Palestine war.

Although originally intended to oversee Gaza’s rebuilding, the board’s charter does not appear to limit its role to the Palestinian territory and seems to aim to rival the United Nations.

Traditional US allies, including France and Britain, have also expressed doubts.

‘Unacceptable line’

Lula and Trump have been in contact several times since their first official meeting in October, which ushered in improved ties after months of animosity between Washington and Brasilia.

As a result, Trump’s administration has exempted key Brazilian exports from 40 percent tariffs that had been imposed on Brazil, and lifted sanctions on a top Brazilian judge.

Earlier this month, Lula said the US attack on Venezuela to abduct President Maduro crossed “an unacceptable line”.

The presidency said the visit would take place after Lula’s trips to India and South Korea in February, and that a date would be set “soon”.

The veteran leftist Lula has held phone calls in recent days with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Source link

Why is Trump skipping the Super Bowl? He says it’s “too far”

The Rams won’t be the only no-shows at the Super Bowl. President Trump will be conspicuous in his absence from the biggest annual, single-day sporting event in the United States.

“It’s just too far away,” Trump told the New York Post. “I would go if, you know, it was a little bit shorter.”

Or perhaps not so far to his left?

Super Bowl LX will be played Feb. 8 at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, part of the San Francisco Bay Area that Trump has so often reviled.

The teams — the New England Patriots and the Seattle Seahawks — hail from deeply entrenched blue states. Massachusetts and Washington have voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every election since 1988.

Trump also has expressed disgust over the musical performers at this year’s game: Bad Bunny and Green Day, both unabashed critics of the current administration. Bad Bunny will play the halftime show while Green Day will perform ahead of the kickoff.

“I’m anti-them,” Trump said. “I think it’s a terrible choice. All it does is sow hatred. Terrible.”

Ahead of a tour last fall to promote his most recent album, Bad Bunny (whose real name is Benito Antonio Martinez Ocasio) announced he would skip the United States because he was afraid of ICE raids at his concerts. The Puerto Rican superstar — who has nearly 84 million monthly listeners on Spotify — explained why he made an exception for the Super Bowl.

“What I’m feeling goes beyond myself,” he said in a statement. “It’s for those who came before me and ran countless yards so I could come in and score a touchdown. This is for my people, my culture and our history.”

Green Day, an American pop-punk band of almost 40 years, has since Trump’s first term swapped a line in the lyrics of the 2004 hit “American Idiot” from “I’m not part of a redneck agenda” to “I’m not part of the MAGA agenda.”

Turning Point USA, the conservative non-profit founded by the late Charlie Kirk, announced in October that it would stage its own counterprogramming to the Super Bowl and stream it on conservative outlets. The “All American Halftime Show” is billed as “Celebrating Faith, Family, & Freedom.” As of Monday, musical artists had not been announced.

Trump became the first sitting president to attend a Super Bowl a year ago when he received a muted, mixed reaction of cheers and boos in New Orleans. But this year, the 5½-hour flight from Washington D.C. to the Bay Area apparently is too long for the president, who in January alone has flown to Switzerland, Detroit and Palm Beach.

Trump has long enjoyed attending high-profile sporting events. He was present at the College Football Playoff title game between Indiana and Miami a week ago and in 2025 attended the Army-Navy college football game, the U.S. Open Final and the Ryder Cup. In 2019, he attended Game 5 of the World Series in Washington D.C., where he was resoundingly booed.

The NFL has resisted pressure to replace Bad Bunny with a performer more politically palatable to Trump.

“There’s a lot of people right now who don’t like Bad Bunny being in the Super Bowl halftime show,” NFL chief marketing officer Tim Ellis said at a conference in October. “Well, not everyone has to like everything we do. Bad Bunny is f—ing awesome.”

Not everyone has to like the teams that earned Super Bowl berths and the states they call home, either. And not everyone has to approve of the venue. That includes the President, who made it clear that if he decides to watch, he’ll do so from a distance.

Source link

Trump sends border advisor Tom Homan to Minnesota as federal immigration tactics face growing scrutiny

As federal immigration tactics face mounting legal and political scrutiny after a U.S. Border Patrol agent fatally shot a Minneapolis man over the weekend, Donald Trump announced Monday he was dispatching his border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota.

Until now, Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino has overseen the federal government’s immigration crackdown in Minnesota. But as the Trump administration’s Department of Homeland Security faces widespread criticism for its aggressive tactics since it launched Operation Metro Surge in December, Trump signaled Monday that he could be shifting strategy as he deploys Homan to the region.

“He has not been involved in that area, but knows and likes many of the people there,” Trump said of Homan on TruthSocial. “Tom is tough but fair, and will report directly to me.”

Trump’s deployment of Homan comes as a federal judge hears arguments Monday on whether to temporarily halt the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement in Minnesota. Meanwhile, Democratic senators plan to oppose a funding bill for DHS, raising the possibility of a partial government shutdown, and a small but growing number of Republicans have joined Democratic calls for a thorough investigation into the killing of Alex Pretti

The Department of Homeland Security said Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse, approached federal officers on the street Saturday morning with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun and “violently resisted” when officers tried to disarm him. But cellphone videos recorded by eye witnesses contradict that account.

According to videos taken on the scene, Pretti was holding a phone, not a handgun, when he stepped in front of a federal agent who was targeting a woman with pepper spray. Federal agents pulled him to the ground and shot him.

Pretti is the second U.S. citizen in Minneapolis to be killed by immigration officers this month. On Jan. 7, Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother, was shot in the head by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer.

Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem raised criticism this weekend when she said that her agency would lead the investigation into Pretti’s killing.

After federal officials denied Minnesota state investigators access to the shooting scene in South Minneapolis, local and state officials in Minnesota accused DHS of mishandling evidence. Late Saturday, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension asked a federal court to block Homeland Security and Justice Department officials from destroying or concealing evidence.

It is not immediately clear how Bovino’s role could change as Homan arrives in Minneapolis.

Noem, who has backed Bovino’s aggressive tactics, said Monday it was “good news” that Homan was going to Minneapolis.

“I have worked closely with Tom over the last year and he has been a major asset to our team,” Noem wrote on X. Homan’s “experience and insight,” she said, would “help us to remove even more public safety threats and violent criminal illegal aliens” off Minneapolis streets.

But some Democrats in Minnesota oppose sending Homan to Minnesota. Minneapolis City Council member Soren Stevenson said the move would only aggravate tension.

“They are losing the battle in people’s minds,” Stevenson told CNN, noting that people could see video evidence contradict federal accounts of border patrol agents’ actions.

“They’re losing this narrative battle, and so he’s sending in his top guard,” Stevenson added. “And really, it’s escalating, because we just want to be left alone. The chaos in our community is coming from ICE. It’s coming from this invasion that we’re under … and it’s got to stop.”

In a short interview with The Wall Street Journal Sunday, Trump criticized Pretti for carrying a gun during protest activity.

“I don’t like any shooting. I don’t like it,” Trump said. “But I don’t like it when somebody goes into a protest and he’s got a very powerful, fully loaded gun with two magazines loaded up with bullets also. That doesn’t play good either.”

The President declined to comment on whether the agent who shot Pretti had done the right thing. “We’re looking,” Trump said when pressed. “We’re reviewing everything and will come out with a determination.”

Democratic officials, including Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, have called on federal immigration officers to leave Minneapolis. On Sunday, Trump suggested they could withdraw, but he did not give a timeline.

“At some point we will leave,” the president said. “They’ve done a phenomenal job.”

Source link

Commentary: Under Trump, the bootlickers have come out in force. Minneapolis cements it

President Trump has an army of bootlickers that seems to stretch to the sunset. Many of them creep around on social media and almost certainly legions of them come from bot accounts on X.

Then there’s Bill Essayli. When it comes to saying anything to please a president with autocratic dreams, the former Assembly member is a bootlicking All-Star.

Att. Gen. Pam Bondi appointed him as the top prosecutor for the Central District of California in April with the explicit mandate to do Donald J. Trump’s will. His record so far has been unsurprisingly embarrassing and outlandish.

An exodus of prosecutors who didn’t care for his staff screaming sessions and boorish press conferences. A felony conviction against a Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy for excessive force that he reduced to a misdemeanor and then unsuccessfully tried to have dismissed. Seeking charges against people who dared protest Trump’s deportation deluge that his office eventually reduced, dropped or lost in court due to lack of evidence despite Essayli publicly boasting they were slam-dunk cases.

The guy can’t even call himself acting U.S. attorney anymore after a judge ruled in October he was “not lawfully serving” in the position since he was never formally appointed in the first place. So you’d think Essayli would hear the music and go back to being an inconsequential California legislator, but no! If there’s one thing Trumpworld has shown, it’s that once you’ve knelt to offer the Dear Leader a lick-and-shine, you better keep it up until your tongue’s as dry as Death Valley.

Which leads us to this weekend. And Essayli’s bootlicking-gone-wrong.

On Saturday morning, Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis shot and killed 37-year-old Alex Jeffrey Pretti after they gang-tackled him. He had tried to help a woman shoved to the ground by a federal immigration officer; an officer maced him and he soon collapsed — and shortly after, was dead. A Department of Homeland Security social media post justified what happened by saying Pretti seemed intent on “want[ing] to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement” because he was in possession of a legally registered handgun. He never brandished it though. In fact, multiple videos showed Pretti clearly holding what looked like a phone as agents swarmed him.

Even though the incident was thousands of miles away from Los Angeles, Essayli had to flick his tongue — it’s the bootlicker way, after all.

“If you approach law enforcement with a gun, there is a high likelihood they will be legally justified in shooting you,” he snickered on social media hours after Pretti died. “Don’t do it!” He also reshared the posts of right-wing social media influencers Jack Posobiec and Andy Ngo who claimed Pretti, an intensive care unit nurse at a Department of Veterans Affairs hospital, was following “antifa” tactics.

Essayli was soon getting smacked around on social media by gun rights groups, including the NRA, which has endorsed Trump in all his presidential races.

A sign is raised in support of Renee Good and Alex Pretti at a candlelight vigil in Los Angeles.

A sign is raised in support of Renee Good and Alex Pretti at a candlelight vigil during a peaceful protest at the federal building in Los Angeles on Saturday.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

It blasted his rant as “dangerous and wrong” on social media, adding that “responsible public voices should be awaiting a full investigation, not making generalizations and demonizing law-abiding citizens.”

The Gun Owners of America, a group that’s even more conservative than the NRA, called Essayli’s comments “untoward,” leading to the first assistant U.S. attorney — because bootlickers love their titles — to whine about the nonprofit “adding words to mischaracterize my statement” even though they directly quoted him.

When history looks back at all the cowards, sycophants, apologists, enablers, henchmen and other miscreants that made Trump possible, the bootlickers will have a starring role. The “I voted for this” tribe — even when this is cruelty and actions that are more those of a Macbeth than an American president.

The bootlicker is a universally reviled archetype. Their bread-and-butter is comforting the most comfortable by afflicting the most afflicted. They try to top fellow bootlickers with even more obsequious acts of flattery, hellbent on making the most damning line of Orwell’s “1984” come to life: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

The bootlicker’s moral compass is malleable. Wherever the Big Boss has moved the goal posts, that’s where he or she will kick the ball. If all goes to hell and America devolves into a rank dictatorship, beware the bootlicker.

The Trump regime currently has a lineup of them that’s like the bootlicking version of the 1927 Yankees.

In addition to Essayli, you have Stephen Miller, who kept calling Pretti an “assassin” and “domestic terrorist” on social media as if repeating the slurs would make them true. Vice President JD Vance, who described Renee Good, a woman shot and killed on Jan. 7 by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Minneapolis after she tried to drive away from him, as a “deranged leftist.”

Repeating what the big bootlickers say is a character trait. Call it the bootlicking trickle-down-effect.

There’s Border Patrol chief at large Gregory Bovino, a migra man a federal judge accused of “outright lying” during depositions over the actions of his team in Chicago this fall. During a news conference about the death of Pretti, Bovino claimed that the victim looked like he “wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement” — the exact same language used in the original Department of Homeland Security social media post on the killing. Hours later, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem also impersonated a macaw, parroting Miller by accusing Pretti of “domestic terrorism.”

On Fox News on Sunday, FBI Director Kash Patel — the agency that in ye olden days would be leading an impartial investigation into what happened to Good, Pretti and other victims of la migra — told host Maria Bartiromo that “No one who wants to be peaceful shows up at a protest with a firearm. That led a skeptical-looking Bartiromo, who’s about as liberal as the Spanish Inquisition, to ask, “And how was he using that handgun in terms of threatening Border Patrol?”

A wide-eyed Patel could only say he trusted Noem’s version of the events.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem speaks at a lectern.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem speaks during a news conference on Saturday to address an incident where federal immigration agents shot and killed Alex Pretti during operations in Minneapolis.

(Al Drago / Getty Images)

These are just some of the most prominent, powerful bootlickers stumbling right now on their own deceit and desperation.

Space prohibits me from quoting all the Republicans who last week were stalwart 2nd Amendment fans now saying Pretti had no right to carry his legally registered firearm to a protest even though they cheered on Kyle Rittenhouse when the Wisconsin teen showed up at one very openly carrying an AR-15, which he ended up using to fatally shoot two people who tried to assault him. There’s no evidence Pretti ever handled his firearm during the protest, let alone threatened federal agents with it.

Then there’s the bootlickers who cheered on the Jan. 6 rioters for rising up against what they saw as government tyranny, who insist the dozens of law enforcement officers injured that day were just deep-state agents. Today, those bootlickers are telling folks pushing back against Trump’s police state to respect it.

Obey or die.

The Roman philosopher Plutarch described flatterers in his immortal essay on the subject as “the plague in kings’ chambers, and the ruin of their kingdoms” that “prey upon a noble quarry.” So to Essayli, Patel, Noem and all the other bootlickers in Trump’s orbit, and to the relatively anonymous legions beyond, I’ll leave you with the warning that I saw in a meme that I’m sure Plutarch would endorse:

No matter how hard you lick it, the boot will never love you.

Source link

Trump’s Greenland episode raises doubts about NATO’s future

The crisis touched off by President Trump’s demand to take ownership of Greenland appears over, at least for now. But the United States and its European allies still face a larger long-term challenge: Can their shaky marriage be saved?

At 75 years old, NATO has survived storms before, from squabbles over trade to estrangement over wars in Vietnam and Iraq. France, jealous of its independence, even pulled its armed forces out of NATO for 43 years.

But diplomats and foreign policy scholars warn that the current division in the alliance may be worse, because Trump’s threats on Greenland convinced many Europeans that the United States has become an unreliable and perhaps even dangerous ally.

The roots of the crisis lie in the president’s frequently expressed disdain for alliances in general and NATO in particular.

Long before Trump arrived in the White House, presidents from both parties complained that many NATO countries weren’t pulling their weight in military spending.

But earlier presidents still considered the alliance an essential asset to U.S. foreign policy and the cornerstone of a system that prevented war in Europe for most of a century.

Trump has never seemed to share that view. Even after he succeeded in persuading NATO members to increase their defense spending, he continued to deride most allies as freeloaders.

Until last year, he refused to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to help defend other NATO countries, the core principle of the alliance. And he reserved the right to walk away from any agreement, military or commercial, whenever it suited his purpose.

In the two-week standoff over Greenland, he threatened to seize the island from NATO member Denmark by force, an action that would have violated the NATO treaty.

When Britain, Germany and other countries sent troops to Greenland, he threatened to hit them with new tariffs, which would have violated a trade deal Trump made only last year.

Both threats touched off fury in Europe, where governments had spent most of the past year making concessions to Trump on both military spending and tariffs. When Trump backed down, the lesson some leaders drew was that pushing back worked better than playing nice.

“We do prefer respect to bullies,” French President Emmanuel Macron said.

“Being a happy vassal is one thing. Being a miserable slave is something else,” Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said.

The long-term danger for the United States, scholars said, is that Europeans might choose to look elsewhere for military and economic partners.

“They just don’t trust us,” said Richard N. Haass, a former top State Department official in the George W. Bush administration.

“A post-American world is fast emerging, one brought about in large part by the United States taking the lead in dismantling the international order that this country built,” he wrote last week.

Some European leaders, including Macron, have argued that they need to disentangle from the United States, build military forces that can defend against Russia, and seek more reliable trade partners, potentially including India and China.

But decoupling from the United States would not be easy, fast or cheap. Europe and Canada still depend on the United States for many of their defense needs and as a major market for exports.

Almost all NATO countries have pledged to increase defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product, but they aren’t scheduled to reach that goal until 2035.

Meanwhile, they face the current danger of an expansionist Russia on their eastern frontier.

Not surprisingly for a group of 30 countries, Europe’s NATO members aren’t united on the question. Macron has argued for more autonomy, but others have called for caution.

“Despite all the frustration and anger of recent months, let us not be too quick to write off the transatlantic partnership,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said at Davos.

“I think we are actually in the process of creating a stronger NATO,” said Finnish President Alexander Stubb. “As long as we keep doing that, slowly and surely we’ll be just fine.”

They argue, in effect, that the best strategy is to muddle through — which is what NATO and Europe have done in most earlier crises.

The strongest argument for that course may be the uncertainty and disorder that would follow a rapid erosion — or worse, dissolution — of an alliance that has helped keep its members safe for most of a century.

The costs of that outcome, historian Robert Kagan warned recently, would be borne by Americans as well as Europeans.

If the United States continues to weaken its commitments to NATO and other alliances, he wrote in the Atlantic, “The U.S. will have no reliable friends or allies, and will have to depend entirely on its own strength to survive and prosper. This will require more military spending, not less. … If Americans thought defending the liberal world order was too expensive, wait until they start paying for what comes next.”

Source link