Picking a Marine to run Navy shows China that Britain is serious about amphibious warfare
The First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, to give Gen Sir Gwyn his full title, is responsible for commanding the 'dark blue' part of the Navy – the ships, submarines and aircraft that project Britain's global maritime power (which has admittedly been eroded by decades of underfunding).
But he also commands the 6,000 or so Royal Marines who are expected to storm enemy beaches once safely delivered to combat zones by their sister organisation.
The problem in recent years has been twofold. First, that phrase, 'safely delivered'.
With modern anti-ship missiles able to reach hundreds of miles out to sea and ubiquitous surveillance from satellites and drones, just getting to the fight has been seen in recent years as a huge problem, one which has focused the minds of those in the Ministry of Defence who wear Royal Navy uniforms.
The second problem causing some angst to Britain's naval planners – and particularly those from the Royal Marines – has been how to fight in territory held (or dominated) by an enemy force, even if our own troops can make it safely to the shore.
These two issues have led to the development of the Future Commando Force concept: an amphibious group able to defend itself at sea, project force onto land and take the fight to the enemy once ashore.
Finding a way to do this effectively in the face of fearsome (mainly Chinese) capabilities that can render such an outfit irrelevant has taken considerable teamwork from both sides of the Navy.
Gen Sir Gwyn is seen as the perfect champion to lead this work, having a foot in both camps and a deep understanding of the capabilities of each in the face of a challenge that is worsening daily.
Senior Royal Navy officers have already told The Telegraph that Gen Sir Gwyn's appointment is a positive endorsement of the Future Commando Force concept.
It marks a significant uptick in the fortunes of the Royal Marines.
With the UK re-focused on global conflict after the expeditionary years in Iraq and Afghanistan, some analysts had cautioned that the days of amphibious forces were over.
Power projection, they argued, would come from the air, through long-range precision missiles and drones knocking out enemy defences. Regular infantry from the Army could then be dropped off by friendly naval ships to march into the newly-acquired territory.
What would the point be of expensive specialised amphibious troops such as the Royal Marines, if the concept of surviving, let alone fighting one's way into such an environment had been rendered irrelevant by technology?
To accept that maxim, however, would be an act of self-deterrence and an endorsement of one of the key theories of Sun Tzu as he wrote in The Art of War.
The ancient Chinese philosopher theorised that the supreme art of war was to subdue the enemy without fighting. He advocated achieving victory through strategic manoeuvring, diplomacy and the display of military might to make an enemy force decide it was not worth fighting in the first place.
The Future Commando Force has looked at this problem and decided against self-deterrence.
It is believed that small, aggressive groups, highly supported by technology such as secure communications, drones and radars, and operating in concert when required can get inside an area dominated by an enemy force (under the somewhat clunkily titled Anti-Access/Area Denial, or A2AD, umbrella) and project sufficient power to hold on until heavier forces arrive.
Such a force does not come cheap, however, and will require some reorganisation not just of the Navy and Marines, but also Britain's Army, which would be required to offer supporting functions.
Cash and the desire for more tinkering with the organisation chart are currently in short supply.
However, it is an idea very much in line with current thinking in the US Marine Corps (if not totally bought-into yet by the wider US Navy), the cousins alongside whom Britain's commando forces, based around a core of Royal Marines, might have to fight if China decided to test Taiwan's defences and the world's appetite to reject military conquest.
Britain's maritime planners – both Navy and Marine – hope the 'Future' part of the concept will be jettisoned in the Government's long-delayed Strategic Defence Review, currently inching tortuously towards publication this summer.
The endorsement of the Prime Minister, through the appointment of Gen Sir Gwyn, suggests that is a likely scenario. The US, and China, will have taken note.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
Chinese researchers suggest lasers and sabotage to counter Musk's Starlink satellites
ROME -- Stealth submarines fitted with space-shooting lasers, supply-chain sabotage and custom-built attack satellites armed with ion thrusters. Those are just some of the strategies Chinese scientists have been developing to counter what Beijing sees as a potent threat: Elon Musk' s armada of Starlink communications satellites. Chinese government and military scientists, concerned about Starlink's potential use by adversaries in a military confrontation and for spying, have published dozens of papers in public journals that explore ways to hunt and destroy Musk's satellites, an Associated Press review found. Chinese researchers believe that Starlink — a vast constellation of low-orbit satellites that deliver cheap, fast and ubiquitous connectivity even in remote areas — poses a high risk to the Chinese government and its strategic interests. That fear has mostly been driven by the company's close ties to the U.S. intelligence and defense establishment, as well as its growing global footprint. 'As the United States integrates Starlink technology into military space assets to gain a strategic advantage over its adversaries, other countries increasingly perceive Starlink as a security threat in nuclear, space, and cyber domains,' wrote professors from China's National University of Defense Technology in a 2023 paper. Chinese researchers are not the only ones concerned about Starlink, which has a stranglehold on certain space-based communications. Some traditional U.S. allies are also questioning the wisdom of handing over core communications infrastructure — and a potential trove of data — to a company run by an unpredictable foreign businessman whose allegiances are not always clear. Apprehensions deepened after Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine made clear the battlefield advantages Starlink satellites could convey and have been exacerbated by Musk's proliferating political interests. Musk pumped tens of millions of dollars into President Donald Trump's reelection effort and emerged, temporarily, as a key adviser and government official. As Musk toys with the idea of starting his own political party, he has also taken an increasing interest in European politics, using his influence to promote an array of hard-right and insurgent figures often at odds with establishment politicians. Musk left the Trump administration in May and within days his relationship with Trump publicly imploded in a feud on social media. SpaceX, the rocket launch and space-based communications company that Musk founded and that operates Starlink, remains inextricably linked with core U.S. government functions. It has won billions in contracts to provide launch services for NASA missions and military satellites, recuperate astronauts stranded at the International Space Station and build a network of spy satellites for the National Reconnaissance Office. Starlink's space dominance has sparked a global scramble to come up with viable alternatives. But its crushing first-mover advantage has given SpaceX near monopoly power, further complicating the currents of business, politics and national security that converge on Musk and his companies. Since its first launches in 2019, Starlink has come to account for about two-thirds of all active satellites, according to Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who writes a newsletter tracking satellite launches. SpaceX operates more than 8,000 active satellites and eventually aims to deploy tens of thousands more. Beijing's tendency to view Starlink as tool of U.S. military power has sharpened its efforts to develop countermeasures — which, if deployed, could increase the risk of collateral damage to other customers as SpaceX expands its global footprint. The same satellites that pass over China also potentially serve Europe, Ukraine, the United States and other geographies as they continue their path around the earth. Starlink says it operates in more than 140 countries, and recently made inroads in Vietnam, Niger, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Pakistan. In June, Starlink also obtained a license to operate in India, overcoming national security concerns and powerful domestic telecom interests to crack open a tech-savvy market of nearly 1.5 billion people. On the company's own map of coverage, it has very few dead zones beyond those in North Korea, Iran and China. No other country or company is close to catching up with Starlink. Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos has taken aim at rival Musk with Project Kuiper, which launched its first batch of internet satellites into orbit in April. So far Amazon has just 78 satellites in orbit, with 3,232 planned, according to McDowell, and London-based Eutelstat OneWeb has around 650 satellites in orbit, a fraction of the fleet it had initially planned. The European Union is spending billions to develop its own satellite array — called the IRIS2 initiative — but remains woefully behind. EU officials have had to lobby their own member states not to sign contracts with Starlink while it gets up and running. 'We are allies with the United States of America, but we need to have our strategic autonomy,' said Christophe Grudler, a French member of the European Parliament who led legislative work on IRIS2. 'The risk is not having our destiny in our own hands.' China has been public about its ambition to build its own version of Starlink to meet both domestic national security needs and compete with Starlink in foreign markets. In 2021, Beijing established the state-owned China SatNet company and tasked it with launching a megaconstellation with military capabilities, known as Guowang. In December, the company launched its first operational satellites, and now has 60 of a planned 13,000 in orbit, according to McDowell. Qianfan, a company backed by the Shanghai government, has launched 90 satellites out of some 15,000 planned. The Brazilian government in November announced a deal with Qianfan, after Musk had a scorching public fight with a Brazilian judge investigating X, who also froze Space X's bank accounts in the country. Qianfan is also targeting customers in Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan and Uzbekistan and has ambitions to expand across the African continent, according to a slide presented at a space industry conference last year and published by the China Space Monitor. Concerns about Starlink's supremacy were supercharged by Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The war was a turning point in strategic thinking about Starlink and similar systems. Ukraine used the Starlink network to facilitate battlefield communications and power fighter and reconnaissance drones, providing a decisive ground-game advantage. At the same time, access to the satellites was initially controlled by a single man, Musk, who can — and did — interrupt critical services, refusing, for example, to extend coverage to support a Ukrainian counterattack in Russia-occupied Crimea. U.S.-led sanctions against Moscow after the full-scale invasion also curtailed the availability of Western technology in Russia, underscoring the geopolitical risks inherent in relying on foreign actors for access to critical infrastructure. 'Ukraine was a warning shot for the rest of us,' said Nitin Pai, co-founder and director of the Takshashila Institution, a public policy research center based in Bangalore, India. 'For the last 20 years, we were quite aware of the fact that giving important government contracts to Chinese companies is risky because Chinese companies operate as appendages of the Chinese Communist Party. Therefore, it's a risk because the Chinese Communist Party can use technology as a lever against you. Now it's no different with the Americans.' Nearly all of the 64 papers about Starlink reviewed by AP in Chinese journals were published after the conflict started. Starlink's omnipresence and potential military applications have unnerved Beijing and spurred the nation's scientists to action. In paper after paper, researchers painstakingly assessed the capabilities and vulnerabilities of a network that they clearly perceive as menacing and strove to understand what China might learn — and emulate — from Musk's company as Beijing works to develop a similar satellite system. Though Starlink does not operate in China, Musk's satellites nonetheless can sweep over Chinese territory. Researchers from China's National Defense University in 2023 simulated Starlink's coverage of key geographies, including Beijing, Taiwan, and the polar regions, and determined that Starlink can achieve round-the-clock coverage of Beijing. 'The Starlink constellation coverage capacity of all regions in the world is improving steadily and in high speed,' they concluded. In another paper — this one published by the government-backed China Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team — researchers mapped out vulnerabilities in Starlink's supply chain. 'The company has more than 140 first-tier suppliers and a large number of second-tier and third-tier suppliers downstream,' they wrote in a 2023 paper. 'The supervision for cybersecurity is limited.' Engineers from the People's Liberation Army, in another 2023 paper, suggested creating a fleet of satellites to tail Starlink satellites, collecting signals and potentially using corrosive materials to damage their batteries or ion thrusters to interfere with their solar panels. Other Chinese academics have encouraged Beijing to use global regulations and diplomacy to contain Musk, even as the nation's engineers have continued to elaborate active countermeasures: Deploy small optical telescopes already in commercial production to monitor Starlink arrays. Concoct deep fakes to create fictitious targets. Shoot powerful lasers to burn Musk's equipment.
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Chinese researchers suggest lasers and sabotage to counter Musk's Starlink satellites
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'As the United States integrates Starlink technology into military space assets to gain a strategic advantage over its adversaries, other countries increasingly perceive Starlink as a security threat in nuclear, space, and cyber domains,' wrote professors from China's National University of Defense Technology in a 2023 paper. Advertisement Chinese researchers are not the only ones concerned about Starlink, which has a stranglehold on certain space-based communications. Some traditional U.S. allies are also questioning the wisdom of handing over core communications infrastructure — and a potential trove of data — to a company run by an unpredictable foreign businessman whose allegiances are not always clear. Apprehensions deepened after Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine made clear the battlefield advantages Starlink satellites could convey and have been exacerbated by Musk's proliferating political interests. Advertisement Musk pumped tens of millions of dollars into President Donald Trump's reelection effort and emerged, temporarily, as a key adviser and government official. As Musk toys with the idea of starting his own political party, he has also taken an increasing interest in European politics, using his influence to promote an array of hard-right and insurgent figures often at odds with establishment politicians. Musk left the Trump administration in May and within days his relationship with Trump publicly imploded in a feud on social media. SpaceX, the rocket launch and space-based communications company that Musk founded and that operates Starlink, remains inextricably linked with core U.S. government functions. It has won billions in contracts to provide launch services for NASA missions and military satellites, recuperate astronauts stranded at the International Space Station and build a network of spy satellites for the National Reconnaissance Office. Starlink's space dominance has sparked a global scramble to come up with viable alternatives. But its crushing first-mover advantage has given SpaceX near monopoly power, further complicating the currents of business, politics and national security that converge on Musk and his companies. Starlink dominates space Since its first launches in 2019, Starlink has come to account for about two-thirds of all active satellites, according to Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who writes a newsletter tracking satellite launches. SpaceX operates more than 8,000 active satellites and eventually aims to deploy tens of thousands more. Beijing's tendency to view Starlink as tool of U.S. military power has sharpened its efforts to develop countermeasures — which, if deployed, could increase the risk of collateral damage to other customers as SpaceX expands its global footprint. The same satellites that pass over China also potentially serve Europe, Ukraine, the United States and other geographies as they continue their path around the earth. Advertisement Starlink says it operates in more than 140 countries, and recently made inroads in Vietnam, Niger, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Pakistan. In June, Starlink also obtained a license to operate in India, overcoming national security concerns and powerful domestic telecom interests to crack open a tech-savvy market of nearly 1.5 billion people. On the company's own map of coverage, it has very few dead zones beyond those in North Korea, Iran and China. No other country or company is close to catching up with Starlink. Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos has taken aim at rival Musk with Project Kuiper, which launched its first batch of internet satellites into orbit in April. So far Amazon has just 78 satellites in orbit, with 3,232 planned, according to McDowell, and London-based Eutelstat OneWeb has around 650 satellites in orbit, a fraction of the fleet it had initially planned. The European Union is spending billions to develop its own satellite array — called the IRIS2 initiative — but remains woefully behind. EU officials have had to lobby their own member states not to sign contracts with Starlink while it gets up and running. 'We are allies with the United States of America, but we need to have our strategic autonomy,' said Christophe Grudler, a French member of the European Parliament who led legislative work on IRIS2. 'The risk is not having our destiny in our own hands.' China has been public about its ambition to build its own version of Starlink to meet both domestic national security needs and compete with Starlink in foreign markets. In 2021, Beijing established the state-owned China SatNet company and tasked it with launching a megaconstellation with military capabilities, known as Guowang. In December, the company launched its first operational satellites, and now has 60 of a planned 13,000 in orbit, according to McDowell. Advertisement Qianfan, a company backed by the Shanghai government, has launched 90 satellites out of some 15,000 planned. The Brazilian government in November announced a deal with Qianfan, after Musk had a scorching public fight with a Brazilian judge investigating X, who also froze Space X's bank accounts in the country. Qianfan is also targeting customers in Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan and Uzbekistan and has ambitions to expand across the African continent, according to a slide presented at a space industry conference last year and published by the China Space Monitor. Russia's invasion of Ukraine supercharges concerns Concerns about Starlink's supremacy were supercharged by Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The war was a turning point in strategic thinking about Starlink and similar systems. Ukraine used the Starlink network to facilitate battlefield communications and power fighter and reconnaissance drones, providing a decisive ground-game advantage. At the same time, access to the satellites was initially controlled by a single man, Musk, who can — and did — interrupt critical services, refusing, for example, to extend coverage to support a Ukrainian counterattack in Russia-occupied Crimea. U.S.-led sanctions against Moscow after the full-scale invasion also curtailed the availability of Western technology in Russia, underscoring the geopolitical risks inherent in relying on foreign actors for access to critical infrastructure. 'Ukraine was a warning shot for the rest of us,' said Nitin Pai, co-founder and director of the Takshashila Institution, a public policy research center based in Bangalore, India. 'For the last 20 years, we were quite aware of the fact that giving important government contracts to Chinese companies is risky because Chinese companies operate as appendages of the Chinese Communist Party. Therefore, it's a risk because the Chinese Communist Party can use technology as a lever against you. Now it's no different with the Americans.' Advertisement Nearly all of the 64 papers about Starlink reviewed by AP in Chinese journals were published after the conflict started. Assessing Starlink's capabilities and vulnerabilities Starlink's omnipresence and potential military applications have unnerved Beijing and spurred the nation's scientists to action. In paper after paper, researchers painstakingly assessed the capabilities and vulnerabilities of a network that they clearly perceive as menacing and strove to understand what China might learn — and emulate — from Musk's company as Beijing works to develop a similar satellite system. Though Starlink does not operate in China, Musk's satellites nonetheless can sweep over Chinese territory. Researchers from China's National Defense University in 2023 simulated Starlink's coverage of key geographies, including Beijing, Taiwan, and the polar regions, and determined that Starlink can achieve round-the-clock coverage of Beijing. 'The Starlink constellation coverage capacity of all regions in the world is improving steadily and in high speed,' they concluded. In another paper — this one published by the government-backed China Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team — researchers mapped out vulnerabilities in Starlink's supply chain. 'The company has more than 140 first-tier suppliers and a large number of second-tier and third-tier suppliers downstream,' they wrote in a 2023 paper. 'The supervision for cybersecurity is limited.' Advertisement Engineers from the People's Liberation Army, in another 2023 paper, suggested creating a fleet of satellites to tail Starlink satellites, collecting signals and potentially using corrosive materials to damage their batteries or ion thrusters to interfere with their solar panels. Other Chinese academics have encouraged Beijing to use global regulations and diplomacy to contain Musk, even as the nation's engineers have continued to elaborate active countermeasures: Deploy small optical telescopes already in commercial production to monitor Starlink arrays. Concoct deep fakes to create fictitious targets. Shoot powerful lasers to burn Musk's equipment. Some U.S. analysts say Beijing's fears may be overblown, but such assessments appear to have done little to cool domestic debate. One Chinese paper was titled, simply: 'Watch out for that Starlink.' Chen reported from Washington.
CNBC
2 hours ago
- CNBC
Trump's Aug. 1 tariff deadline is near. These are the countries that have — and have not — signed a deal
Come Friday, the world will have to contend with higher tariff rates from the Trump administration, raising the specter of even more economic uncertainty. For most countries, that can of worms has been kicked twice down the road, from "Liberation Day" on April 2, to July 9, and now to Aug. 1. Back in April, Trump had claimed to have done "over 200 deals" in an interview with Time Magazine, and trade advisor Peter Navarro had said that "90 deals in 90 days" was possible. The country has fallen far short of that, with only eight deals in 120 days, including one with the 27-member European Union. Here are where things stand in global trade. The U.K. led the charge on trade agreements with the U.S., striking one as early as May. The framework includes a 10% baseline tariffs on U.K. goods, as well as various quotas and exemptions for products such as autos and aerospace goods. But even after U.S. President Donald Trump met with Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Scotland recently, some points in their trade agreement remain uncertain. That includes tariffs on U.K. steel and aluminum, which the U.S. agreed to slash. Talks about the U.K.'s digital services tax, which Trump wants scrapped, also seem to be continuing. Vietnam was the second to cross the line with the Trump administration, with Trump announcing a trade agreement on July 2 that saw the tariff imposed on Vietnam slashed from 46% to 20%. One point with Vietnam was a 40% "transshipping" tariff on goods originating in another country and transferred to Vietnam for final shipment to the U.S, although it is not clear how this will be applied. Trump also claimed that there would be full market access to the country for U.S. goods. Chinese manufacturers have used transshipping to sidestep the hefty tariffs on its direct shipments to the United States, using Vietnam as a major transshipment hub. However, it seems that Vietnam was blindsided by the 20% rate imposed, according to a report by Politico. Politico said negotiators had expected a 11% levy, but Trump unilaterally announced the 20% rate. Indonesia's tariff rate was cut to 19% from 32% in its agreement with Trump, announced on July 15. The White House said Indonesia will eliminate tariff barriers on over 99% of U.S. products exported to Indonesia across all sectors, including agricultural products and energy. The framework also says the countries will also address various "non-tariff barriers" and other obstacles that the U.S. faces in Indonesian markets. Unlike its ASEAN counterparts above, which had sizable reductions to its tariff duties, the Philippines saw a decrease of a single percentage point to 19% from 20% on July 22. Manila will not impose tariffs on U.S. goods as part of the agreement, according to Trump, who praised the country for what he described as "going OPEN MARKET with the United States." In addition, Trump also said that the Philippines will work together "Militarily," without specifying any details. The two countries are already treaty allies, with Manila hosting U.S. troops and having a mutual defense treaty going back to 1951. Japan was the second major Asian economy to come to an agreement with the U.S. after China, seeing its tariff rate cut to 15% from 25% on July 23, and being the first economy to see a lower preferential tariff rate for its key automobile sector. Trump called the agreement "perhaps the largest Deal ever made," while adding that Japan would invest $550 billion in the United States and the U.S. would "receive 90% of the Profits." The path to this agreement was fraught with uncertainty, with Trump saying days before the agreement that he did not expect the two countries to reach a deal. He described Japan on separate occasions as "very tough" in trade talks and suggested the country was "spoiled" for not accepting U.S. rice despite facing a domestic rice shortage. The European Union's agreement with the U.S. was struck just days ago, after long negotiations. EU goods are now facing a 15% baseline tariff rate, half the 30% Trump had previously threatened the bloc with. Existing duties on autos will be reduced to 15%, and levies on some products like aircraft and certain drug generics will go back to pre-January levels. But the deal has been met with criticism, including from some European leaders. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou went as far as saying it was an act of "submission" and a "dark day." EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic, however, called it "the best deal we could get under very difficult circumstances." South Korea is the latest country to reach an agreement, on Thursday, with the terms being somewhat similar to the one Japan received. The country will see a blanket 15% tariff on its exports, while duties on its auto sector are also lowered to 15%. South Korea "will give to the United States $350 Billion Dollars for Investments owned and controlled by the United States, and selected by myself, as President," Trump said. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said "90% of the profits" from that $350 billion investment will be "going to the American people." However, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung said the $350 billion fund will play a role in facilitating the "active entry" of Korean companies into the U.S. market into industries such as shipbuilding and semiconductors. The Trump administration's trade talks with China has taken a different tack than the rest of the world. The world's second largest economy was firmly in Trump's trade crosshairs from the moment he took office. Rather than a deal, China has reached a series of suspensions over its "reciprocal" tariff rate. It was initially hit with a 34% tariff from "Liberation Day," before a series of back-and-forth measures between the two sides saw the duties skyrocket to 145% duties for Chinese imports to the U.S. and 125% for U.S. imports to China. However, both sides agreed to reduced tariffs in May, after their first trade meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. The truce was agreed to last till Aug. 12. China currently faces a 30% combined tariff rate, while the U.S. is looking at 10% duties. The countries' most recent meeting in Stockholm ended without a truce extension, but U.S. Treasury Secretary said that any truce extension will not be agreed to until Trump signs off on the plan. For countries without a deal, it appears that a higher global baseline tariff of about 15%-20% will be slapped on them, according to Trump, higher than the 10% baseline announced on "Liberation Day." Countries with a trade surplus with the U.S. will most likely see a higher "reciprocal" tariff rate. Here are some key trading partners that have not agreed to a deal with the U.S. On Wednesday, Trump announced a 25% tariff on India, with an additional unspecified "penalty" for what he views as unfair trade policies and for India's purchase of military equipment and energy from Russia. "While India is our friend, we have, over the years, done relatively little business with them because their Tariffs are far too high, among the highest in the World," Trump said in a post on Truth Social. The 25% tariff rate is modestly lower than what Trump imposed on India on "Liberation Day," when he announced a 26% rate on the key trading partner, but at the high end of the 20%-25% range that the U.S. president said he was considering. There has been frequent back-and-forth between Canada and the U.S. over tariffs in recent months, with the country being hit by duties even before Trump announced his so-called "reciprocal" tariffs. Canada is now facing 35% tariffs on various goods from Aug. 1, with Trump also threatening to increase that rate in case of retaliation. The rate is separate from any sectoral tariffs. Trump has repeatedly cited drugs flowing from Canada to the U.S. as a reason for his move to impose tariffs. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said earlier this week that the partners were in an "intense phase" of talks, noting that it would be unlikely for an agreement not to include any tariffs, Reuters reported. Like Canada, Mexico has also long been a U.S. tariff target, with Trump citing drugs and illegal migration as factors in his decision to announce levies on the U.S.' southern neighbor. The president has said that Mexico has not done enough to secure the border. Mexico is set to be hit with a 30% tariff, with any retaliation set to be met with an even higher rate from the U.S. The Mexican government has stressed that it is important for the trading partners to resolve their issues ahead of Aug. 1, but there have not been many signs of progress toward an agreement in recent weeks. Australia currently faces the baseline 10% as it runs a trade deficit with the United States. However, the country could be facing a higher tariff rate if Trump decides to raise his baseline rate to 15%-20%. Canberra has not been publicly known to be in trade talks with Washington, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese reportedly arguing that Australia's deficit with the U.S. and its free trade agreement should mean there should be no tariff on Australian imports. Most recently, Australia relaxed restrictions on U.S. beef, a move which the office of the U.S. trade representative credited to Trump, but Albanese had reportedly said the move was not prompted by Trump.
