Connect with us

Politics

Trump suggests Ukraine, Russia may need to ‘fight for a while’ – National TenX News

Published

on


President Donald Trump said Thursday that it might be better to let Ukraine and Russia “fight for a while” before pulling them apart and pursuing peace.

In an Oval Office meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Trump likened the war in Ukraine — which Russia invaded in early 2022 — to a fight between two young children who hated each other.

“Sometimes you’re better off letting them a fight for a while and then pulling them apart,” Trump said. He added that he had relayed that analogy to Russian President Vladimir Putin in their phone conversation on Wednesday.

Asked about Trump’s comments as the two leaders sat next to each other, Merz stressed that both he and Trump agreed “on this war and how terrible this war is going on,” pointing to the U.S. president as the “key person in the world” who would be able to stop the bloodshed.

Story continues below advertisement

But Merz also emphasized that Germany “was on the side of Ukraine” and that Kyiv was only attacking military targets, not Russian civilians.

“We are trying to get them stronger,” Merz said of Ukraine.


Click to play video: 'Little Progress Made in Russia and Ukraine Peace Talks'


Little Progress Made in Russia and Ukraine Peace Talks


Thursday’s meeting marked the first time that the two leaders sat down in person. After exchanging pleasantries — Merz gave Trump a gold-framed birth certificate of the U.S president’s grandfather Friedrich Trump, who immigrated from Germany — the two leaders were to discuss issues such as Ukraine, trade and NATO spending.

Trump and Merz have spoken several times by phone, either bilaterally or with other European leaders, since Merz took office on May 6. German officials say the two leaders have started to build a “decent” relationship, with Merz wanting to avoid the antagonism that defined Trump’s relationship with one of his predecessors, Angela Merkel, in the Republican president’s first term.

Story continues below advertisement

The 69-year-old Merz — who came to office with an extensive business background — is a conservative former rival of Merkel’s who took over her party after she retired from politics.

A White House official said topics that Trump is likely to raise with Merz include Germany’s defense spending, trade, Ukraine and what the official called “democratic backsliding,” saying the administration’s view is that shared values such as freedom of speech have deteriorated in Germany and the country should reverse course. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to preview the discussions.


But Merz told reporters Thursday morning that if Trump wanted to talk German domestic politics, he was ready to do that but he also stressed Germany holds back when it comes to American domestic politics.

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.

Merz has thrown himself into diplomacy on Ukraine, traveling to Kyiv with fellow European leaders days after taking office and receiving Zelenskyy in Berlin last week. He has thanked Trump for his support for an unconditional ceasefire while rejecting the idea of “dictated peace” or the “subjugation” of Ukraine and advocating for more sanctions against Russia.

In their first phone call since Merz became chancellor, Trump said he would support the efforts of Germany and other European countries to achieve peace, according to a readout from the German government. Merz also said last month that “it is of paramount importance that the political West not let itself be divided, so I will continue to make every effort to produce the greatest possible unity between the European and American partners.”

Story continues below advertisement


Click to play video: 'Russia and Ukraine agree to prisoner swap, but peace talks stall'


Russia and Ukraine agree to prisoner swap, but peace talks stall


Under Merz’s immediate predecessor, Olaf Scholz, Germany became the second-biggest supplier of military aid to Ukraine after the United States. Merz has vowed to keep up the support and last week pledged to help Ukraine develop its own long-range missile systems that would be free of any range limits.

In his remarks on Thursday, Trump still left the threat of sanctions on the table. He said sanctions could be imposed for both Ukraine and Russia.

“When I see the moment where it’s not going to stop … we’ll be very, very tough,” Trump said.

At home, Merz’s government is intensifying a drive that Scholz started to bolster the German military after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In Trump’s first term, Berlin was a target of his ire for failing to meet the current NATO target of spending two per cent of gross domestic product on defense, and Trump is now demanding at least five per cent from allies.

Story continues below advertisement

The White House official said the upcoming NATO summit in the Netherlands later this month is a “good opportunity” for Germany to commit to meeting that five per cent mark.

Scholz set up a 100 billion euro (US$115 billion) special fund to modernize Germany’s armed forces — called the Bundeswehr — which had suffered from years of neglect. Germany has met the two per cent target thanks to the fund, but it will be used up in 2027.

Merz has said that “the government will in the future provide all the financing the Bundeswehr needs to become the strongest conventional army in Europe.” He has endorsed a plan for all allies to aim to spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on their defense budgets by 2032, plus an extra 1.5 per cent on potentially defense-related things like infrastructure.

Another top priority for Merz is to get Germany’s economy, Europe’s biggest, moving again after it shrank the past two years. He wants to make it a “locomotive of growth,” but Trump’s tariff threats are a potential obstacle for a country whose exports have been a key strength. At present, the economy is forecast to stagnate in 2025.

Germany exported US$160 billion worth of goods to the U.S. last year, according to the Census Bureau. That was about US$85 billion more than what the U.S. sent to Germany, a trade deficit that Trump wants to erase.

Story continues below advertisement

“Germany is one of the very big investors in America,” Merz told reporters Thursday morning. “Only a few countries invest more than Germany in the USA. We are in third place in terms of foreign direct investment.”


Click to play video: 'Ukraine claims drone strike on Russian air bases as both sides prepare for peace talks'


Ukraine claims drone strike on Russian air bases as both sides prepare for peace talks


The U.S. president has specifically gone after the German auto sector, which includes major brands such as Audi, BMW, Mercedes Benz, Porsche and Volkswagen. Americans bought US$36 billion worth of cars, trucks and auto parts from Germany last year, while the Germans purchased US$10.2 billion worth of vehicles and parts from the U.S.

Trump’s 25 per cent tariff on autos and parts is specifically designed to increase the cost of German-made automobiles in hopes of causing them to move their factories to the U.S., even though many of the companies already have plants in the U.S. with Volkswagen in Tennessee, BMW in South Carolina and Mercedes-Benz in Alabama and South Carolina.

Story continues below advertisement

There’s only so much Merz can achieve on his view that tariffs “benefit no one and damage everyone” while in Washington, as trade negotiations are a matter for the European Union’s executive commission. Trump recently delayed a planned 50 per cent tariff on goods coming from the European Union, which would have otherwise gone into effect this month.

One source of strain in recent months is a speech Vice President JD Vance gave in Munich shortly before Germany’s election in February, in which he lectured European leaders about the state of democracy on the continent and said there is no place for “firewalls.”

That term is frequently used to describe mainstream German parties’ refusal to work with the far-right Alternative for Germany, which finished second in the election and is now the biggest opposition party.

Merz criticized the comments. He told ARD television last month that it isn’t the place of a U.S. vice president “to say something like that to us in Germany; I wouldn’t do it in America, either.”

Moulson reported from Berlin. Associated Press writer Josh Boak in Washington contributed to this report.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Politics

“Unacceptable’: Allies react to Trump Greenland tariff threats – National TenX News

Published

on


World leaders are raising alarm after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to impose sweeping tariffs on European allies in an effort to pressure Denmark into negotiations over Greenland.

The move is sparking protests across the Arctic and sharp rebukes from Europe and Canada.

On Saturday, thousands of people marched through snow and ice in Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, chanting “Greenland is not for sale,” waving national flags.

Police described the demonstration as the largest they have ever seen in the city.

About 825 kilometres away, dozens of people rallied in Iqaluit, Nunavut, in a show of solidarity with Greenlanders.

“Greenland is owned by the Greenlandic people,” protesters chanted in Inuktut as they marched for an hour in freezing, windy conditions.

The protests came as Trump announced he would impose a 10 per cent import tax starting next month on goods from eight European countries.

Story continues below advertisement

These nations include Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland, because of their opposition to U.S. control of Greenland.

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.

The tariff would rise to 25 per cent on June 1 if no deal was reached for what Trump called the “Complete and Total purchase of Greenland.”

The president suggested the tariffs were leveraged to force talks over Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark that Trump says is vital to U.S. national security.

French President Emmanuel Macron said France stands firmly behind Greenland’s sovereignty and rejected the use of trade threats.


“Tariff threats are unacceptable and have no place in this context,” Macron wrote on social media, adding that Europeans would respond “in a united and coordinated manner” if the measures are confirmed.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Greenland’s future is for Greenlanders and Denmark to decide.

“Applying tariffs on allies for pursuing the collective security of NATO allies is completely wrong,” Starmer said, adding the issue would be raised directly with the U.S. administration.

Bob Rae, former Canadian ambassador to the United Nations, also chimed in on Trump’s announcement.

The tariff threat could mark a significant rupture between the U.S. and its NATO allies.

Story continues below advertisement

Greenland already hosts the U.S.-run Pituffik Space Base under a 1951 defence agreement with Denmark, supporting missile warning, missile defence and space surveillance for the U.S. and NATO.

“There is no sign of the Trump war of aggression against Greenland and Denmark letting up. It is not about ‘security’ any more than Venezuela was about ‘narco-terrorism.’ They are both about seizing control and plunder.”

He further added, “No country, including my own, Canada, is safe or secure.”

The tariff threat could mark a significant rupture between the U.S. and its NATO allies.

Trump is expected to face questions about the proposed tariffs and Greenland later this week.

He is scheduled to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos, alongside several European leaders he has threatened with tariffs.

— With files from The Canadian Press 

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



Continue Reading

Politics

Canada talks trade with Qatar as Carney touches down in Doha – National TenX News

Published

on


Prime Minister Mark Carney arrived in Doha on Saturday as part of a push to attract foreign investment and deepen Canada’s economic partnerships beyond its traditional allies.

Carney’s visit comes on the heels of his visit to China and follows the recent presentation of a new federal investment budget aimed at positioning Canada as a stable, attractive destination for global capital.

In a news conference on Saturday, Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said Canada is working to broaden its economic relationships as global trade patterns shift.

Qatar is viewed by Ottawa as a strategic partner, with officials pointing to the country’s significant investment capacity and growing influence on the global stage.

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 to reduce our dependence and increase our self-reliance to find a strategic path forward,” Champagne said.

Story continues below advertisement

“Engaging with the Middle East and China is necessary for Canada, just like our European partners have done,” Champagne added.  “We buy more from the U.S.A. than anywhere else, but the trading climate right now is different.”

The conference highlighted Canada’s industrial capacity and trade advantages as key selling points for potential investors.

Champagne also said international engagement is critical as Canada works to raise its profile among global investors.

“We are one of the G7s with very big industries. We build cars, planes, ships, we have an abundance of energy, and we are the only one with free trade with all G7,” Champagne said. “With the way the world is changing, you better diversify, supply chain is changing and we need to adapt.”

Prime Minister Carney is expected to meet with senior Qatari officials, including Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, as well as representatives of the Qatar Investment Authority.

His office says the talks will focus on expanding trade access and forging partnerships in artificial intelligence, infrastructure, energy and defence.

The visit comes amid heightened geopolitical tensions in the region, though officials say the schedule remains unchanged.


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



Continue Reading

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

TRENDING

Copyright © 2022 TenX News Network