Connect with us

Politics

Trump meets with Zelenskyy, signals he’s not ready to sell Ukraine missiles – National TenX News

Published

on


U.S. President Donald Trump is hosting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for talks at the White House on Friday, with the U.S. leader signaling he’s not ready to agree to sell Kyiv a long-range missile system that the Ukrainians say they desperately need.

Zelenskyy arrived with top aides to discuss the latest developments with Trump over lunch, a day after the U.S. president and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a lengthy phone call to discuss the conflict.

At the start of the talks, Zelenskyy congratulated Trump over landing last week’s ceasefire and hostage deal in Gaza and said Trump now has “momentum” to stop the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

“President Trump now has a big chance to finish this war,” Zelenskyy added.

Zelenskyy also said he had come to Washington with a “proposition” in which Ukraine could provide the United States with its advanced drones, while Washington would sell Kyiv the long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Story continues below advertisement

Trump said he believed Ukraine was manufacturing “very good” drones but expressed reluctance about tapping into the U.S. Tomahawk supply.

“I have an obligation also to make sure that we’re completely stocked up as a country, because you never know what’s going to happen in war and peace,” Trump said.


Click to play video: 'Trump says Putin dissuaded him from sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine'


Trump says Putin dissuaded him from sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine


In recent days, Trump had shown an openness to selling Ukraine the Tomahawks, even as Putin warned that such a move would further strain the U.S.-Russian relationship.

But following Thursday’s call with Putin, Trump appeared to downplay the prospects of Ukraine getting the missiles, which have a range of about 995 miles (1,600 kilometers.)

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

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.

“We need Tomahawks for the United States of America too,” Trump said. “We have a lot of them, but we need them. I mean we can’t deplete for our country.”

Story continues below advertisement

Zelenskyy had been seeking the weapons, which would allow Ukrainian forces to strike deep into Russian territory and target key military sites, energy facilities and critical infrastructure. Zelenskyy has argued that the potential for such strikes would help compel Putin to take Trump’s calls for direct negotiations to end the war more seriously.

But Putin warned Trump during the call that supplying Kyiv with the Tomahawks “won’t change the situation on the battlefield, but would cause substantial damage to the relationship between our countries,” according to Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s foreign policy adviser.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said that talk of providing Tomahawks had already served a purpose by pushing Putin into talks. “The conclusion is that we need to continue with strong steps. Strength can truly create momentum for peace,” Sybiha said on the social platform X late Thursday.

Ukrainian officials have also indicated that Zelenskyy plans to appeal to Trump’s economic interests by aiming to discuss the possibility of energy deals with the U.S.


Click to play video: 'Trump says Russian economy nearing collapse, but Putin won’t stop Ukraine war'


Trump says Russian economy nearing collapse, but Putin won’t stop Ukraine war


Zelenskyy is expected to offer to store American liquefied natural gas in Ukraine’s gas storage facilities, which would allow for an American presence in the European energy market.

Story continues below advertisement

He previewed the strategy on Thursday in meetings with Energy Secretary Chris Wright and the heads of American energy companies, leading him to post on X that it is important to restore Ukraine’s energy infrastructure after Russian attacks and expand “the presence of American businesses in Ukraine.”

It is the fourth face-to-face meeting for Trump and Zelenskyy since the Republican returned to office in January, and their second in less than a month.

Trump announced following Thursday’s call with Putin that he would soon meet with the Russian leader in Budapest, Hungary, to discuss ways to end the war. The two also agreed that their senior aides, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, would meet next week at an unspecified location.


The president said Friday it was “to be determined” if Zelenskyy would be involved in the talks in Hungary — suggesting a “double meeting” with the warring countries’ leaders was likely the most workable option for productive talks.

“These two leaders do not like each other, and we want to make it comfortable for everybody,” Trump added.

Ahead of his call with Putin, Trump had shown signs of increased frustration with the Russian leader.

Last month, he announced that he believed Ukraine could win back all territory lost to Russia, a dramatic shift from the U.S. leader’s repeated calls for Kyiv to make concessions to end the war.

Story continues below advertisement


Click to play video: 'Russia will expand war beyond Ukraine if not stopped, Zelenskyy warns UN'


Russia will expand war beyond Ukraine if not stopped, Zelenskyy warns UN


Trump, going back to his 2024 campaign, insisted he would quickly end the war, but his peace efforts appeared to stall following a diplomatic blitz in August, when he held a summit with Putin in Alaska and a White House meeting with Zelenskyy and European allies.

Trump emerged from those meetings certain he was on track to arranging direct talks between Zelenskyy and Putin. But the Russian leader hasn’t shown any interest in meeting with Zelenskyy and Moscow has only intensified its bombardment of Ukraine.

Asked if he was concerned that Putin was stringing him along, Trump acknowledged it was a possibility but said he was confident he could handle the Russian leader.

“I’ve been played all my life by the best of them, and I came out pretty well,” Trump said. He added, “I think I’m pretty good at this stuff.”

Story continues below advertisement

AP writer Michelle L. Price contributed reporting.

&copy 2025 The Canadian Press



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

How could Canada, EU, NATO respond to a U.S. takeover of Greenland? – National TenX News

Published

on


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.


Click to play video: 'Trump says ‘not a thing’ Denmark can do if Russia or China wants to ‘occupy’ Greenland'


Trump says ‘not a thing’ Denmark can do if Russia or China wants to ‘occupy’ Greenland


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.

Story continues below advertisement

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.

Story continues below advertisement

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 the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

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.


Click to play video: 'Denmark, U.S. still disagree on Greenland’s future after White House talks'


Denmark, U.S. still disagree on Greenland’s future after White House talks


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.

Story continues below advertisement

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.

Story continues below advertisement

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.


Click to play video: 'NATO countries concerned about Arctic security as Trump pushes for Greenland ownership'


NATO countries concerned about Arctic security as Trump pushes for Greenland ownership


“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.

Story continues below advertisement

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.”




Continue Reading

Politics

Louvre raises ticket prices for non-Europeans, hitting Canadian visitors TenX News

Published

on


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.


Click to play video: 'French police arrest 5 more suspects in Louvre heist investigation'


French police arrest 5 more suspects in Louvre heist investigation


Visitors from EU countries, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, will continue to pay the lower rate.

Story continues below advertisement

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.

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

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.”


Click to play video: 'Louvre slammed for spending money on art instead of security in years before heist'


Louvre slammed for spending money on art instead of security in years before heist


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.

Story continues below advertisement

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.”


&copy 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.



Continue Reading

Politics

Trump calls Canada-China deal ‘good thing’ as U.S. officials voice concern – National TenX News

Published

on


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.

Story continues below advertisement

“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 the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.

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.


Click to play video: 'Carney welcomes ‘new era’ of Canada-China relations following ‘historic agreement’ with Xi Jinping'


Carney welcomes ‘new era’ of Canada-China relations following ‘historic agreement’ with Xi Jinping


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.

Story continues below advertisement

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.”


Click to play video: '‘I don’t trust what the Chinese put in these cars’: Doug Ford unhappy about Canada-China EV deal'


‘I don’t trust what the Chinese put in these cars’: Doug Ford unhappy about Canada-China EV deal


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.

Story continues below advertisement

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


&copy 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.



Continue Reading

TRENDING

Copyright © 2022 TenX News Network