Politics
As some nations face destruction, UN listens to Trump decry climate ‘scam’ – National TenX News
Some countries’ leaders are watching rising seas threaten to swallow their homes. Others are watching their citizens die in floods, hurricanes and heat waves, all exacerbated by climate change.
But the world U.S. President Donald Trump described in his speech at the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday didn’t match the one many world leaders in the audience are contending with. Nor did it align with what scientists have long been observing.
“This ‘climate change,’ it’s the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion,” Trump said. “All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people that have cost their countries fortunes and given those same countries no chance for success. If you don’t get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail.”
Trump has long been a critic of climate science and polices aimed at helping the world transition to green energies like wind and solar. His speech Tuesday, however, was one of his most expansive to date. It included false statements and making connections between things that are not connected.
Ilana Seid, an ambassador from the island nation of Palau and head of the organization of small island states, was in the audience. She said it’s what they’ve come to expect from Trump and the United States. She added that not acting on climate change will “be a betrayal of the most vulnerable,” a sentiment echoed by Evans Davie Njewa of Malawi, who said that “we are endangering the lives of innocent people in the world.”
For Adelle Thomas, a climate scientist who has published more than 40 studies and has a doctorate, climate change disasters are personal, too. A vice chair of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s top body on climate science, Thomas is from the Bahamas and said she experienced firsthand “the devastation of the climate disaster” when Hurricane Sandy hit the Caribbean and New York City, the city Trump was speaking from, in 2012.
“Millions of people around the world can already testify to the devastation that climate change has brought to their lives,” she said. ‘The evidence is not abstract. It is lived, it is deadly, and it demands urgent action.”
A look at some of Trump’s statements Tuesday, the science behind them and the reaction:
WHAT HE SAID: Trump called renewable sources of energy like wind power a “joke” and “pathetic,” falsely claiming they don’t work, are too expensive and too weak.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.
THE BACKSTORY: Solar and wind are now “almost always” the least expensive and the fastest options for new electricity generation, according to a July report from the United Nations. That report also said the world has passed a “positive tipping point” where those energy sources will only continue to become more widespread.
The three cheapest electricity sources globally last year were onshore wind, solar panels and new hydropower, according to an energy cost report by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).
Subsidies endorsed by Trump and the Republican party are artificially keeping fossil fuels viable, said University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann. “If one were truly in favor of the ‘free market’ to determine this, then fossil fuels would be disappearing even faster,” he wrote in an email.
Relatedly, Trump falsely claimed European electricity bills are now “two to three times higher than the United States, and our bills are coming way down.” But in fact retail electricity prices in the United States have increased faster than the rate of inflation since 2022, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The agency expects prices to continue increasing through 2026.
On the international politics of climate, the UN and the Paris Accord
WHAT HE SAID: Trump blasted the U.N.’s climate efforts, saying he withdrew America from the “fake” Paris climate accord because “America was paying so much more than every country, others weren’t paying.”
THE BACKSTORY: The Paris Agreement, decided by international consensus in 2015, is a voluntary but binding document in which each country is asked to set its own national goal to curb planet-warming emissions and decide how much money it will contribute to the countries that will be hit hardest by climate change.
Because carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for more than a century, the United States has put out more of the heat trapping gas than any other nation, even though China now is the No. 1 carbon polluter. Since 1850, the U.S. has contributed 24% of the human-caused carbon dioxide that’s in the air, according to Global Carbon Project data. The entire continent of Africa, with four times the population of the U.S., is responsible for about 3%.
On coal being referred to as clean
WHAT HE SAID: “I have a little standing order in the White House. Never use the word ‘coal.’ Only use the words ‘clean, beautiful coal.’ Sounds much better, doesn’t it?”
THE BACKSTORY: Coal kills millions of people a year. “The president can pretend coal is clean, but real people — mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters— will die for this lie,’’ said Stanford University climate scientist Rob Jackson.
Trump also called the carbon footprint “a hoax made up by people with evil intentions,” a contention that Texas A&M University climate scientist Andrew Dessler agreed with. Dessler said the term was coined by oil companies and may have been designed to shift the responsibility for combatting climate change away from corporations to individuals.
The science of climate change started 169 years ago when Eunice Foote did simple experiments with flasks and sunlight showing that carbon dioxide trapped more heat than the regular atmosphere. It’s an experiment that can be repeated at home and has been done in labs hundreds of times and in greenhouses around the world every day. It is basic physics and chemistry with a long history.
“It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land,” reported the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which is hundreds of scientists, with doctorates in the field.
In 2018, Trump’s own government said: “The impacts of global climate change are already being felt in the United States and are projected to intensify in the future.”
WHAT HE SAID: In “the United States, we have still radicalized environmentalists and they want the factories to stop. Everything should stop. No more cows. We don’t want cows anymore.”
THE BACKSTORY: Cows belch methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Around the world, cattle are often raised on lands where forests have cut down. Since forests capture carbon dioxide, cutting them to raise cattle results in a doubly whammy. Still, no one is suggesting that cows be gotten rid of, said Nusa Urbancic, CEO of the Changing Markets Foundation.
“This polarizing and divisive language misrepresents the environmental message,” Urbancic wrote. “What is true, however, is that cutting methane emissions is a quick win to slow global heating and meet climate targets.”
Trump also blamed dirty air blowing in from afar, floating garbage in the ocean coming from other countries and “radicalized environmentalists.”
Although the United States does indeed now have cleaner air than it has in decades, the pollution seeping into communities is primarily caused by local dirty energy and industry projects, not by other countries. And many experts have said the biggest blow to local air and water quality is the Trump administration’s own wide-ranging rollbacks to the power of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other bedrock environmental laws.
“It is sad to see marine debris, a globally important issue, being misrepresented so completely,” said Lucy Woodall, an associate professor of marine conservation and policy at the University of Exeter.
The possibility of a forceful U.S. takeover of Greenland is raising many unprecedented questions — including how Canada, the European Union and NATO could respond or even retaliate against an ostensible ally.
A high-level meeting between Greenlandic, Danish and U.S. officials this week did not resolve the “fundamental disagreement” over the territory’s sovereignty but did set the stage for more talks. The White House made clear Thursday that U.S. President Donald Trump’s desire to control Greenland has not changed after the meeting.
“He wants the United States to acquire Greenland. He thinks it’s in our best national security to do that,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.
Denmark and European allies are sending more troops to the territory in a show of force and to display a commitment to Arctic security.
Experts say there are other, non-military measures available in the event of a U.S. annexation or invasion of Greenland, or which could at least be threatened to try and get Trump to back down.
Whether those economic measures are actually used is another matter, those experts say.
“I think it remains highly unlikely that we’ll get to that point where we have to seriously discuss consequences for a U.S. move on Greenland,” said Otto Svendsen, an associate fellow with the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“So it remains contingency planning for a highly unlikely event. That being said … Denmark would certainly do everything in its power to rally a very robust European response.”
Here’s what that could entail.
EU trade, tech disruptions?
Experts agree the biggest pressure points that can be used in the U.S. surround trade and technology.
The European Parliament’s trade committee is currently debating whether to postpone implementing the trade deal signed between Trump and the EU last summer to protest the threats against Greenland, Reuters reported Wednesday.
Many lawmakers have complained that the deal is lopsided, with the EU required to cut most import duties while the U.S. sticks to a broad 15 per cent tariff for European goods.
Get daily National news
Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.
An even bolder move would be triggering the EU’s anti-coercion instrument — known as the “trade bazooka” — that would allow the bloc to hit non-member nations with tariffs, trade restrictions, foreign investment bans, and other penalties if that country is found to be using coercive economic measures.
Although the regulation defines coercion as “measures affecting trade and investment,” Svendsen said it could feasibly be used in a diplomatic or territorial dispute as well.
“EU lawyers have proven themselves to be very creative in recent years,” he said.
However, David Perry, president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said in an email that economic measures against the U.S. are unlikely “given the massive asymmetry in the defence and economic relationship between the U.S.” and other western nations.
“Any kind of sanction against the U.S. doesn’t make sense for the same reason they can impose tariffs on others: they have the power,” Perry added.
Target U.S. tech companies?
The likeliest — and potentially least harmful — scenario for retaliation in the event of an attack on Greenland, Svendsen said, would be fines or bans against U.S. tech companies like Google, Meta and X operating in Europe.
That’s because the Trump administration has taken particular focus on preventing what they call “attacks” on American companies by foreign governments seeking to regulate their online content or tax their revenues, which has led to calls on Canada, Britain and the EU to repeal laws like digital services taxes.
“I think that would be a really smart and targeted way to get to economic interests very close to the president, while minimizing the direct impact on the on the European economy,” Svendsen said, calling such a move “low-hanging fruit.”
He also compared a future U.S. tech platform ban to how Europe moved to wean itself off Russian gas after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
“If you told anyone back then that Europe would basically rid itself of its dependence on Russian gas basically within a two-year period … that would have been considered completely impossible,” he said.
“Weaning the European economy off of U.S. tech would certainly be painful in the short term, but they’ve proven that they can get off those dependencies quickly if there is political will behind it in the past.”
A U.S. hostile takeover of Greenland would mean the “end” of the NATO alliance, experts and European leaders have said.
Trump himself has acknowledged it could be a “choice” between preserving the alliance or acquiring Greenland.
There is no provision within the NATO founding treaty that addresses the possibility of a NATO member taking territory from another, and how the alliance should respond to such an act.
A NATO spokesperson told Global News it wouldn’t “speculate on hypothetical scenarios” when asked how it could potentially act.
“None of this would be actionable in a NATO sense,” Perry said. “It’s an alliance that’s organized to bind the U.S. to European security, and revolves around the U.S. So there’s no scenario of NATO doing that to the U.S.”
Denmark and other European nations could move to reduce or close U.S. military bases in their countries as a possible response, experts say.
Balkan Devlen, a a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and director of its Transatlantic Program, said in an interview that a U.S. annexation of Greenland would force Canada to focus entirely on boosting its defences in the Arctic.
That may include trying to decouple from NORAD, the joint northern defence network with the U.S., in favour of a purely domestic Arctic command, he said — although that process would take years and require Canada to increase defence spending even further.
“Never mind five per cent (of GDP) — we will probably need to go like seven, eight, nine per cent on defence spending to be able to do anything of that sort,” he said. “It’s not even clear that we’ll be able to have enough people to do that.”
Devlen added that any retaliatory action, whether military or financial, needs to be targeted and proportionate to what the U.S. does.
“The problem with nuclear options is that once you use it, it’s gone,” he said. “And if it doesn’t do the damage or make the change of behaviour on the other party, you’ve basically lost a lot of leverage and you might actually sustain a lot more loss yourself.”
A trip to the world’s most-visited museum is about to cost Canadians significantly more.
France has hiked ticket prices at the Louvre by 45 per cent for visitors from outside the European Union, a move that is fuelling debate over so-called dual pricing and the growing backlash against overtourism.
Starting this week, adult visitors from non-EU countries, including Canada, must pay €32 to enter the Paris landmark, up from €22. That’s an increase from about $35 to $52 Canadian.
Visitors from EU countries, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, will continue to pay the lower rate.
The price hike comes as the Louvre grapples with repeated labour strikes, a high-profile daylight jewel heist last October that prompted a costly security overhaul, and years of chronic overcrowding. The museum attracts roughly nine million visitors annually.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.
Some Canadian tourists told Global News they feel unfairly targeted.
“We didn’t cause the robberies or some of the other issues that happened and we are paying the consequences,” said Allison Moore, visiting Paris from Newfoundland with her daughter. “[In] Canada we don’t discriminate over pricing like that.”
Others argue tourists already shoulder higher costs simply by travelling long distances.
“In general for tourists, I think things should be a little cheaper than for local people, because we have to travel to come all the way here,” said Darla Daniela Quiroz, another Canadian visitor. “It should be equal pricing, or a little bit cheaper.”
Even some Europeans question the two-tiered system. A French tourist interviewed outside the museum said there was “no reason” to charge non-Europeans more and that the fee should be the same for everyone.
Tourism experts say the Louvre’s financial pressures help explain the decision.
“The Louvre is really cash-strapped right now and needs to do something,” said Marion Joppe, a professor at the University of Guelph. “It can’t really look to the government, which is already struggling with its own budget.”
The move also reflects a broader global pushback against mass tourism. Anti-tourism protests have spread across parts of Spain, New Zealand has increased its entry tax, and the United States recently raised national park fees for foreign visitors.
“You take Paris — it gets about 50 million tourists a year,” said Julian Karaguesian, an economist at McGill University. “That’s roughly a million a week. The city simply wasn’t built for those kinds of numbers.”
Despite the higher price, many visitors say they will still line up to see the Mona Lisa and other of the museum’s famous artworks.
“It’s one of the main attractions. It’s on everybody’s list,” Moore said. “We’re still going to go, and hopefully it will be worth it in the end.”
© 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.
Politics
Trump calls Canada-China deal ‘good thing’ as U.S. officials voice concern – National TenX News
Canada’s new trade deal with China is getting a mixed reaction in Washington, with U.S. President Donald Trump voicing support as administration officials warned Ottawa could regret allowing Chinese EVs into the Canadian market.
The deal signed with Beijing on Friday reverses course on 100 per cent tariffs Canada slapped on Chinese electric vehicles in 2024, which aligned with similar U.S. duties. Canada and China also agreed to reduce tariffs on canola and other products.
Asked about the deal by reporters at the White House, Trump said Prime Minister Mark Carney was doing the right thing.
“That’s what he should be doing. It’s a good thing for him to sign a trade deal. If you can get a deal with China, you should do that,” Trump said.
However, members of Trump’s cabinet expressed concern.
“I think they’ll look back at this decision and surely regret it to bring Chinese cars into their market,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said at an event with other U.S. government officials at a Ford factory in Ohio to tout efforts to make vehicles more affordable.
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told reporters the limited number of vehicles would not impact American car companies exporting cars to Canada.
“I don’t expect that to disrupt American supply into Canada,” he said.
“Canada is so dependent on the United States for their GDP. Their entire population is crowded around our border for that reason. I’ll tell you one thing: if those cars are coming into Canada, they’re not coming here. That’s for sure.”
Get daily National news
Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.
Carney has said it’s necessary for Canada to improve trade ties and cooperation with China in light of Trump’s trade war and threats to let the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on free trade expire.
The trade pact is up for review this summer, and Greer reiterated that the Trump administration wants to bring more auto manufacturing back to the U.S. and incentivize companies to do so.
Under the new deal with Beijing, Carney said he expects China will lower tariffs on its canola seed by March 1 to a combined rate of about 15 per cent.
Greer questioned that agreement in a separate CNBC interview.
“I think in the long run, they’re not going to like having made that deal,” he said.
He called the decision to allow Chinese EVs into Canada “problematic” and added: “There’s a reason why we don’t sell a lot of Chinese cars in the United States. It’s because we have tariffs to protect American auto workers and Americans from those vehicles.”
Greer said rules adopted last January on vehicles that are connected to the internet and navigation systems are a significant impediment to Chinese vehicles in the U.S. market.
“I think it would be hard for them to operate here,” Greer said. “There are rules and regulations in place in America about the cybersecurity of our vehicles and the systems that go into those, so I think it might be hard for the Chinese to comply with those kind of rules.”
Trump and officials like Greer have taken aim at Chinese attempts to enter the North American car market through Mexico by bypassing rules of origin under CUSMA.
The CUSMA review set for July is expected to address those loopholes that American and Canadian officials have said are being exploited by China.
Those concerns, which were also raised by the Biden administration, in part helped spur the steep tariffs on Chinese EVs, which are heavily subsidized by Beijing.
Trump, however, has also said he would like Chinese automakers to come to the United States to build vehicles.
Both Democrat and Republican lawmakers in the U.S. have expressed strong opposition to Chinese vehicles as major U.S. automakers warn China poses a threat to the U.S. auto sector.
Ohio Senator Bernie Moreno, a Republican, said at Friday’s event at the Ford plant that he was opposed to Chinese vehicles coming into the United States, and drew applause from the other government officials.
“As long as I have air in my body, there will not be Chinese vehicles sold the United States of America — period,” Moreno said.
—with files from Reuters
© 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.
How could Canada, EU, NATO respond to a U.S. takeover of Greenland? – National TenX News
Louvre raises ticket prices for non-Europeans, hitting Canadian visitors TenX News
Trump calls Canada-China deal ‘good thing’ as U.S. officials voice concern – National TenX News
-
Fashion10 months agoThese ’90s fashion trends are making a comeback in 2017
-
Entertainment10 months agoThe final 6 ‘Game of Thrones’ episodes might feel like a full season
-
TenX Exclusive10 months agoअमर योद्धा: राइफलमैन जसवंत सिंह रावत की वीरगाथा
-
Politics8 months agoBefore being named Pope Leo XIV, he was Cardinal Robert Prevost. Who is he? – National TenX News
-
Politics9 months agoPuerto Rico faces island-wide blackout, sparking anger from officials – National TenX News
-
Fashion10 months agoAccording to Dior Couture, this taboo fashion accessory is back
-
Tech10 months agoIndian-AI-software-which-caught-30-thousand-criminals-and-busted-18-terrorist-modules-its-demand-is-increasing-in-foreign-countries-also – News18 हिंदी
-
Politics9 months agoScientists detect possible signs of life on another planet — but it’s not aliens – National TenX News