Connect with us

Politics

Trump speaks with Putin as he considers selling Ukraine long-range missiles – National TenX News

Published

on


U.S. President Donald Trump said Thursday he was speaking with Russia’s Vladimir Putin as he considers Ukraine’s push for long-range missiles.

“I am speaking to President Putin now,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social website shortly after a White House official confirmed the call to the Associated Press and Reuters.

“The conversation is ongoing, a lengthy one, and I will report the contents, as will President Putin, at its conclusion. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

The call comes ahead of Trump’s meeting on Friday at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has been pressing Trump to sell Kyiv Tomahawk missiles that would allow Ukrainian forces to strike deeper into Russian territory. Zelenskyy has argued such strikes would help compel Putin to take Trump’s calls for direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine to end the war more seriously.

Story continues below advertisement

Trump had told reporters traveling with him to Israel on Sunday that he had planned to discuss the Tomahawks with Putin as a way to pressure him to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. “Do they want to have Tomahawks going in that direction? I don’t think so,” Trump said on Sunday. “I think I might speak to Russia about that.”


Click to play video: 'Trump hints at giving Ukraine Tomahawk missiles if Russia doesn’t end war'


Trump hints at giving Ukraine Tomahawk missiles if Russia doesn’t end war


The White House official who disclosed the Trump-Putin call was not authorized to comment on it publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

With a fragile Israel-Hamas ceasefire and hostage deal holding, Trump has said he’s now turning his attention to bringing the war in Ukraine to an end and is weighing providing Kyiv long-range weaponry as he looks to prod Moscow to the negotiating table.

Ending the wars in Ukraine and Gaza was central to Trump’s 2024 reelection pitch, in which he persistently pilloried President Joe Biden for his handling of the conflicts. Yet, like his predecessor, Trump also has been stymied by Putin as he’s unsuccessfully pressed the Russian leader to hold direct talks with Zelenskyy to end the war, which is nearing its fourth year.

Story continues below advertisement

But fresh off the Gaza ceasefire, Trump is showing new confidence that he can finally make headway on ending the Russian invasion. He’s also signaling that he’s ready to step up pressure on Putin if he doesn’t come to the table soon.

“Interestingly we made progress today, because of what’s happened in the Middle East,” Trump said of the Russia-Ukraine war on Wednesday evening as he welcomed supporters of his White House ballroom project to a glitzy dinner.


Click to play video: 'Large parts of Kyiv in dark after Russian attack as Ukraine hits back at oil and gas sector'


Large parts of Kyiv in dark after Russian attack as Ukraine hits back at oil and gas sector


Earlier this week in Jerusalem, in a speech to the Knesset, Trump predicted the truce in Gaza would lay the groundwork for the U.S. to help Israel and many of its Middle East neighbors normalize relations. But Trump also made clear his top foreign policy priority now is ending the largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II.

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.

“First we have to get Russia done,” Trump said, turning to his special envoy Steve Witkoff, who has also served as his administration’s chief interlocutor with Putin. “We gotta get that one done. If you don’t mind, Steve, let’s focus on Russia first. All right?”

Story continues below advertisement

Trump weighs Tomahawks for Ukraine

Trump is set to host Zelenskyy for talks Friday, their fourth face-to-face meeting this year.

Ahead of the meeting, Trump has said he’s weighing selling Kyiv long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles. Putin has made clear that providing Ukraine with Tomahawks would cross a red line and further damage relations between Moscow and Washington.

But Trump has been undeterred.

“He’d like to have Tomahawks,” Trump said of Zelenskyy on Tuesday. “We have a lot of Tomahawks.”

Agreeing to sell Ukraine Tomahawks would be a splashy move, said Mark Montgomery, an analyst at the conservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington. But it could take years to supply and train Kyiv on the Tomahawk system.


Click to play video: 'Are Russia and Ukraine trying to make the coming winter colder with attacks on infrastructure?'


Are Russia and Ukraine trying to make the coming winter colder with attacks on infrastructure?


Montgomery said Ukraine could be better served in the near term with a surge of Extended Range Attack Munition, or ERAM, missiles and Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS. The U.S. already approved the sale of up to 3,350 ERAMs to Kyiv earlier this year.

Story continues below advertisement

The Tomahawk, with a range of about 995 miles (1,600 kilometers), would allow Ukraine to strike far deeper in Russian territory than either the ERAM (about 285 miles, or 460 km) or ATACMS (about 186 miles, or 300 kilometers).

“To provide Tomahawks is as much a political decision as it is a military decision,” Montgomery said. “The ERAM is shorter range, but this can help them put pressure on Russia operationally, on their logistics, the command and control, and its force disbursement within several hundred kilometers of the front line. It can be very effective.”

Signs of White House interest in new Russia sanctions

Zelenskyy is expected to reiterate his plea to Trump to hit Russia’s economy with further sanctions, something the Republican, to date, has appeared reluctant to do.

Congress has weighed legislation that would lead to tougher sanctions on Moscow, but Trump has largely focused his attention on pressuring NATO members and other allies to cut off their purchases of Russian oil, the engine fueling Moscow’s war machine. To that end, Trump said Wednesday that India, which became one of Russia’s biggest crude buyers after the Ukraine invasion, had agreed to stop buying oil from Moscow.

Story continues below advertisement


Click to play video: 'Putin will ‘drop out’ of Ukraine war if oil prices fall, Trump says: ‘He’s going to have no choice’'


Putin will ‘drop out’ of Ukraine war if oil prices fall, Trump says: ‘He’s going to have no choice’


Waiting for Trump’s blessing is legislation in the Senate that would impose steep tariffs on countries that purchase Russia’s oil, gas, uranium and other exports in an attempt to cripple Moscow economically.

Though the president hasn’t formally endorsed it — and Republican leaders do not plan to move forward without his support — the White House has shown, behind the scenes, more interest in the bill in recent weeks.

Administration officials have gone through the legislation in depth, offering line edits and requesting technical changes, according to two officials with knowledge of the discussions between the White House and the Senate. That has been interpreted on Capitol Hill as a sign that Trump is getting more serious about the legislation, sponsored by close ally Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., along with Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

A White House official said the administration is working with lawmakers to make sure that “introduced bills advance the president’s foreign policy objectives and authorities.” The official, who was granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations, said any sanctions package needs to give the president “complete flexibility.”

Story continues below advertisement

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday the administration is waiting for greater buy-in from Europe, which he noted faces a bigger threat from Russian aggression than the U.S. does.

“So all I hear from the Europeans is that Putin is coming to Warsaw,” Bessent said. “There are very few things in life I’m sure about. I’m sure he’s not coming to Boston. So, we will respond … if our European partners will join us.”

AP writers Fatima Hussein, Chris Megerian and Didi Tang contributed to this report.




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