Spain Says NATO Spat Didn't Prompt Exclusion From Ukraine Talks
'Spain is a very committed ally,' Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares said Tuesday in an interview with Bloomberg TV.
He said he'd received no indication that failure to commit to the NATO goal was in any way linked to Spain's omission from Monday's meeting in Washington between European leaders, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and US President Donald Trump.
The gathering was seen as a win for western allies attempting to steer Trump away from a quick deal at Ukraine's expense — something that appeared more likely after he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska last week.
US and European officials will immediately work on providing Ukraine with robust security guarantees to help bolster the country's armed forces, people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg Tuesday.
The aim is to prevent Russia demanding restrictions on the size of Kyiv's military as part of a future agreement to end the war, the people said.
In his Bloomberg TV interview, Albares said reinforcing Ukraine's army is the best security guarantee available given 'the reality on the ground.'
'That's what we are doing: providing military equipment to make sure that the Ukrainian army is capable of guaranteeing sovereignty and territorial integrity,' he added.
'We need a ceasefire first of all,' he said, at the same time cautioning that 'Russia has given no sign of being in good faith engaged in real conversation for a just and lasting peace.'
In June, Spain raised hackles among some NATO allies by seeking an exemption from the military alliance's new target of committing 5% of gross domestic product to defense. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's government argued that its spending plans are sufficient to meet NATO needs.
Trump subsequently threatened Spain with tariffs twice as high as the rest of the European Union, but hasn't followed through.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
a few seconds ago
- Mint
Canadian dollar falls as inflation data fuels rate cut bets
Canadian dollar falls 0.4% against the greenback Touches its weakest since August 1 at 1.3860 Annual rate of inflation eases to 1.7% 10-year yield declines 4.4 basis points to 3.446% TORONTO, Aug 19 (Reuters) - The Canadian dollar hit its lowest in almost three weeks against its U.S. counterpart on Tuesday as oil prices fell and cooler domestic inflation data raised expectations the Bank of Canada would cut interest rates in the coming months. The loonie was trading 0.4% lower at 1.3855 per U.S. dollar, or 72.18 U.S. cents, after touching its weakest intraday level since August 1 at 1.3860. Canada's annual inflation rate eased to 1.7% in July from 1.9% in the prior month, helped by lower gasoline prices, while 3-month annualized measures of underlying inflation that the BoC closely tracks decelerated to 2.4% from 3.4%, according to Reuters calculations. "I think the more impactful bit of the report is that deceleration in three-month rates of core CPI," said Robert Both, senior Canada macro strategist at TD Securities. "So even with CPI-trim and median still running near 3% year-over-year, the bank has put a little more weight on those three-month core rates." Investors see a 39% chance of a rate cut from the Canadian central bank at the next policy decision on September 17, up from 31% before the data, and have leaned heavily toward an easing of policy by October. The price of oil, one of Canada's major exports, was down 1.1% at $62.71 a barrel as traders assessed the possibility that talks between Russia, Ukraine and the U.S. to end the war in Ukraine could lead to the lifting of sanctions on Russian crude, raising supply. One possible bright spot for the loonie was the ending of a strike by flight attendants at Air Canada, the nation's largest carrier, which could have weighed on the domestic economy. Canadian bond yields moved lower across the curve, with the 10-year down 4.4 basis points at 3.446%. (Reporting by Fergal Smith Editing by Christina Fincher)
Mint
a few seconds ago
- Mint
US Targets Chinese Steel And Lithium for Forced-Labor Scrutiny
(Bloomberg) -- The Trump administration said it will step up scrutiny of imports of steel, copper, lithium and other materials from China to enforce a US ban on goods allegedly made with forced labor in the country's Xinjiang region. The announcement of new 'high-priority sectors' targeted under the four-year-old Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act was included Tuesday in an annual update to the US government's enforcement efforts. It also dovetails with President Donald Trump's broader trade goals, as he seeks to lower the US trade deficit with China and pressures Beijing to curb shipments of fentanyl and precursor chemicals. 'America has a moral, economic, and national security duty to eradicate threats that endanger our nation's prosperity, including unfair trade practices that disadvantage the American people and stifle our economic growth,' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement. Still, the administration went ahead with the announcement at a time when Trump has sought to improve relations with his counterpart, Xi Jinping. The US president last week extended a pause on higher tariffs on goods from China for 90 days as he seeks an in-person meeting with the Chinese leader. Under the 2021 law, the US government assumes that anything made even partially in the Chinese manufacturing hub of Xinjiang is produced with forced labor and cannot be imported into the US. Companies may win exemptions if they can provide 'clear and convincing evidence' forced labor was not used. The measure is meant to help combat alleged repression of Uyghurs and other minorities in the province of Xinjiang. Beijing has repeatedly denied accusations that minorities are compelled to work against their will. Although the law applies to all goods, it originally singled out apparel, cotton and cotton products, tomatoes and silica-based products — including polysilicon — as high-priority sectors for enforcement. Under former President Joe Biden, the government expanded the products subject to extra scrutiny to include aluminum, polyvinyl chloride and seafood. The Trump administration's Tuesday announcement expands the list again to encompass red dates, caustic soda and lithium, as well as steel and copper. The US doesn't import significant tonnage of copper from China, according to data from Morgan Stanley. In 2024, the US imported about 470,000 tons of steel from China, equal to 0.5% of domestic consumption, according to the Commerce Department. --With assistance from Joe Deaux. More stories like this are available on
Mint
a few seconds ago
- Mint
Trump Targets Corporate America to Achieve Economic and Foreign Policy Goals
(Bloomberg) -- He didn't campaign on it. It wasn't even broached during his first administration. He criticized his predecessor for it. But this month President Donald Trump made clear that he's willing to use the full force of the US government to directly intervene in corporate matters to achieve his economic and foreign policy goals. Trump, backed by his team of Wall Street financiers, took the unprecedented step of seeking to collect a portion of money generated from sales of AI chips to China by Nvidia Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. And in a move that could see the US government become Intel Corp.'s largest shareholder, the administration is said to be in talks for taking a 10% stake in the beleaguered chipmaker. Last month, the Pentagon also decided to take a $400 million preferred equity stake in a little-known rare earth mining company. It's a series of moves that has surprised Wall Street and Washington policy veterans, who privately and publicly acknowledged they've never seen anything like it in their decades-long careers. The actions, if successful, could leave private investors and average 401(k) savings holders enriched while catapulting US national security further ahead of China. But they're also risky bets that could end with taxpayer losses and distort markets in ways investors can't predict. 'I'm very concerned that we're going to have these rolling sectors where the president starts saying 'you have to pay us just to sell internationally,'' Lee Munson, the chief investment officer at Portfolio Wealth Advisors, with $390 million in assets under management, said. 'Where does this end? I don't even know how to buy companies right now that have exposure to China that have high-tech IP.' The Trump administration's direct involvement in corporate matters is becoming a marker of the president's second term. Trump, a self-described dealmaker, has a mixed track record of success yet has vowed to bring more of a business approach to governing in Washington. In addition to the Nvidia and AMD revenue promise and potential Intel investment stake, his administration secured the 'Golden Share' from Nippon Steel Corp., a Japanese steelmaker that gives Trump personal power to make decisions on United States Steel Corp. corporate decisions. In these cases, the administration is picking winners and losers, and risks undermining the free flow of capital. 'The Trump administration's focus on industries like steel, semiconductors, and critical minerals is not arbitrary – these sectors are critical to our national and economic security,' White House spokesman Kush Desai said in an emailed statement. 'Cooled inflation, trillions in new investments, historic trade deals, and hundreds of billions in tariff revenue prove how President Trump's hands-on leadership is paving the way towards a new Golden Age for America.' Trump surprised markets earlier this month when he announced Nvidia and AMD agreed to pay the US government 15% of their revenue from AI chip sales to China. The move rankled investors, trade experts, lawmakers and others who feared a much broader slippery slope in which the federal government could begin forcing pay-for-play scenarios in everything from trade negotiations to defense contracts. Word that the White House is contemplating using Chips Act money to take a direct stake in chip-maker Intel added to the uncertainty around changing norms between private sector companies and the US government. The move could provide a much-needed boost to Intel's ambitious plan for a sparkling new chips facility in Ohio, which is vital to rebuilding domestic chip production in the US but which has been delayed amid shrinking sales and mounting losses at the company. SoftBank Group Corp. agreed this week to buy $2 billion of Intel stock in a surprise deal. In America's free market economy, the government typically doesn't buy stakes in companies. There are exceptions, of course, such as during the financial crisis of 2008-2009, when it stepped in to support major names like Citigroup Inc., American International Group Inc. and General Motors Co. While Intel has performance issues to grapple with, it isn't facing the imminent threat of collapse. That's in part why investors, lawmakers, national security experts and others interviewed repeatedly referred to 'uncertainty' and 'uncharted territory' when asked to contemplate the risks associated with Trump's new policies. 'It's state direction that we haven't had in the US, it's very much the Chinese model making its way into US government,' Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said. The Trump administration's approach to public companies in the first year of his second term is in some ways an evolution of the economic statecraft tools he deployed in his first four years as president. Back then he deployed trade levers that hadn't been used in years or decades, from Section 301 tariffs on entire countries, like China, to Section 232 tariffs on sectors like steel and automobiles. The policies weren't popular and they rattled markets, but supporters argued that the tariffs tamped down Chinese and other foreign products that flooded the US market and drove some American companies out of business. Trump has continued to push the boundaries of using novel tools in his second administration. 'What we see here is when it comes to big economic questions like tariffs and fees for exports and also the MP Materials deal, he is willing to push legal boundaries on big economic issues in a way that he wasn't in the first term,' said Peter Harrell, a nonresident scholar for the American Statecraft Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Caitlin Legacki, a former Commerce Department official in the Biden administration, said an argument in favor of 'national champions' is understandable, however a 'lack of transparency' around the deals in concerning. 'Instead of making this a cause for national security or technological independence that people from both parties can rally around, it feels more like a shakedown,' she said. --With assistance from Josh Wingrove and Ryan Gould. More stories like this are available on
