EU leaders meet to discuss tougher Russia sanctions, US tariffs, Middle East conflicts
The heads of the
European Union
's 27 member nations will meet Thursday in Brussels to discuss tougher sanctions on Russia, ways to prevent painful new
US tariffs
, and how to make their voices heard in the
Middle East conflicts
.
Most of the leaders will arrive from a brief but intense NATO summit where they pledged a big boost in defence spending, and papered over some of their differences with US President
Donald Trump
.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will join the EU summit by videoconference, after meeting Trump on Wednesday.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
23.7% Returns in last 5 years with Shriram Life's ULIP
Shriram Life Insurance
US-led NATO downgraded Ukraine from a top priority to a side player this week, but Russia's war in Ukraine remains of paramount concern for the EU.
Members will be discussing an 18th round of sanctions against Russia and whether to maintain a price cap on Russian oil, measures that some nations oppose because it could raise energy prices.
Live Events
Meanwhile, Trump's threatened tariffs are weighing on the EU, which negotiates trade deals on behalf of all 27 member countries. He lashed out at Spain on Wednesday for not spending more on defence and suggested yet more tariffs. France's president called Trump to task for starting a trade war with long time allies.
European leaders are also concerned about fallout from the wars in the Middle East, and the EU is pushing to revive diplomatic negotiations with Iran over its nuclear programme.
EU members have internal disagreements to overcome. They are divided over what to do about European policy toward Israel because of its conduct in Gaza. And left-leaning parties are attacking European Commissioner Ursula von Der Leyen's pivot away from the EU's climate leadership in favour of military investment.
Defence and security are likely to top the agenda. The summit will end with a statement of conclusions that will set the agenda for the bloc for the next four months and can be seen as a bellwether for political sentiment in Europe on major regional and global issues.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Standard
25 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Asian shares end mixed, China benchmark end lower
Asian stocks turned in a mixed performance on Thursday, with Japanese markets hitting a near five-month high boosted by tech shares while Seoul stocks fell sharply due to profit taking following the recent market rally. Gold ticked higher in Asian trade as the dollar weakened after reports that U.S. President Donald Trump was considering replacing Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell as early as September or October. Oil extended overnight gains as a larger-than-expected draw in U.S. crude stocks signaled firm demand. China's Shanghai Composite index ended down 0.22 percent at 3,448.45 after a choppy session as traders assessed simmering economic and geopolitical by Capital Market - Live News
Mint
34 minutes ago
- Mint
China is still choking exports of rare earths despite pact with US
Two weeks after China promised the U.S. it would ease the exports of rare-earth magnets, Chinese authorities are dragging out approval of Western companies' requests for the critical components, a situation that could reignite trade tensions between Washington and Beijing. Western companies say they are receiving barely enough magnets for their factories and have little visibility of future supplies. Firms are waiting weeks as Chinese authorities scrutinize their applications—only to be rejected in some cases. And applications for raw rare earths, which are used to make magnets, are rarely granted. As a result, Western companies are concerned that the shortages could soon affect manufacturing. Companies are so desperate for magnets that they are opting for expensive airfreight whenever licenses are granted to prevent costly production shutdowns. Some manufacturers are experimenting with workarounds that would allow them to make their products without the most powerful magnets. 'It's hand to mouth—the normal supply-chain scrambling that you have to do," said Lisa Drake, a vice president overseeing Ford's industrial planning for batteries and electric vehicles, earlier this week. Although she said the situation had improved, the scarcity of the rare-earth magnets is forcing Ford to 'move things around" to avoid factory shutdowns, she said. Manufacturers have taken the continuing challenges as a sign that new Chinese rare-earth export restrictions, introduced in April after President Trump raised tariffs on China, are here to stay—contrary to White House assertions that the flow of the critical components would return to normal. 'Yes, the export restrictions have been paused on paper. However, ground reality is completely different," said Neha Mukherjee, a rare-earths analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. The licensing process is plagued by 'bureaucratic drag." China's Ministry of Commerce said Thursday that it has been accelerating the review of rare-earth export license applications and has approved 'a certain number." The supply of rare minerals such as gadolinium is tightly controlled by China. The restrictions illustrate the power Beijing holds through its formidable supply chains and how it can use them to inflict pain on Western businesses and exact concessions from the U.S. China makes 90% of the world's most powerful rare-earth magnets, a key component in everything from cars to jet fighters. In April, after Trump heaped stiff tariffs on Chinese products, Beijing established an export-control system for rare earths. While it said the license system was set up to regulate the export of materials for military use, the regime has in effect allowed China to clamp down on rare-earths supplies as it wishes. After April, the supply of magnets to Western businesses slowed to a trickle, causing shock waves for global car, defense and electronics makers. Exports of rare-earth magnets to the U.S. declined 93% in May from a year earlier. Ford stopped production of its Explorer SUV at its Chicago plant for a week in May. The U.S. accused China of slow-walking the approval of export licenses, which China denied. The shortage drove both sides back to the bargaining table earlier this month, where China agreed to free up the flow of rare earths in exchange for the U.S. easing its own restrictions on certain U.S. exports to China. Following the deal, Trump wrote that 'full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied up front by China." However, China put only a six-month limit on any new licenses, The Wall Street Journal has reported. Now, in the applications for export licenses, Chinese authorities are asking Western companies for sensitive details such as contact information of those buying their magnets and even designs of how their magnets are integrated into components like motors. Chinese authorities justify the scrutiny as necessary to ensure the magnets aren't used for military purposes, say companies involved in the magnet trade. The U.S. has accused China of slow-walking the approval of export licenses, which China has denied. When companies skip certain questions on their magnet applications to avoid disclosing sensitive intellectual property or details of commercial arrangements, their applications languish or are denied. In some cases, the applicants have then been told to start over and include all of the required information in a new application, which takes 45 days to process, according to companies involved in rare-earth imports. 'The control is real," said a representative of one such company. 'There are thousands of applications the [Chinese authorities have] received." Earlier this month, Germany's main industry association called on the country's new government to push China to ease the approval process. 'German industry needs to be able to plan in the near term. Licensing procedures must not be used as a means of exerting political pressure," it said. Beijing also appears to be trying to prevent stockpiling by Western businesses. One Chinese magnet maker has warned clients seeking to import more magnets than usual that they may have to explain to government officials the 'business drivers" behind such large orders, according to an advisory note the magnet maker shared with clients. Fearful of shortages, many Western businesses are complying with the information requests—but are still facing long delays. The success of their application also depends on their supplier. Big state-connected magnet companies are getting export licenses faster than smaller private ones, according to many in the industry. 'The export policy for magnet[s] is still very strict," said a representative for one Chinese magnet maker. Now, some Western businesses say they are resigned to the fact that the restrictions may remain in place indefinitely. Some private Chinese magnet makers, who are under significant financial pressure due to the export controls, are working with clients to find workarounds. For instance, some are encouraging foreign clients to buy less-powerful magnets that don't include any controlled rare earths. Some Chinese companies are also working to develop stronger magnets that don't rely on restricted materials such as dysprosium and terbium. But swapping out the most powerful and heat-resistant magnets is often impossible for the auto and electronics industries, which rely on magnets to efficiently power motors. Olive Lien, an expert in semiconductor-cooling technology based in Taiwan, said many companies in recent months have been struggling to acquire rare-earth magnets needed for some high-end fan motors used in products such as AI servers and other high-performance computing systems. Many companies have been forced to redesign their products, such as by switching to cheaper and more readily available ferrite magnets, which are less powerful. One U.S. magnet importer said that while two licensing applications he was involved with were recently approved, others are dragging. 'The system is slow and burdensome," he said. 'Very detailed and confusing for the applicants." When automobile-parts companies do get their licenses approved, they are paying extra to rush the magnets to factories by air, costs which are often ultimately borne by the carmakers. 'These are the things you don't hear about, how much money it is taking to keep these factories running, you know, limping along," the magnet importer said. Write to Jon Emont at
Mint
34 minutes ago
- Mint
Kirloskar cos drag Sebi to court—say key disclosure rules are ‘unconstitutional'
Mumbai: In a dramatic escalation of the long-running Kirloskar family dispute, five listed Kirloskar Group companies have moved the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of a regulation that mandates disclosure of private agreements by promoters, directors, and other stakeholders. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd (KOEL),Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd,Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Ltd,Kirloskar Industries Ltd, and GG Dandekar Properties Ltd have individually filed writ petitions challenging regulations laid down by the Securities and Exchange Board of India. Mint has seen a copy of the petitions. The companies said Sebi's disclosure rules were 'manifestly arbitrary', 'disproportionate', and 'impermissibly retrospective'. They argued that the regulator had overstepped its mandate by effectively compelling listed companies to treat third-party agreements—including those they may not have signed or ratified—as binding and material. The Bombay High Court has sought Sebi's response and is expected to hear the matter on 20 August. The outcome could have wide-ranging implications for corporate disclosures, particularly for companies with complex ownership or family-led structures. The petitioners have contested Regulation 30A and Clause 5A of Para A of Part A of Schedule III of the Sebi (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, as well as Sebi circulars dated 13 July 2023 and 11 November 2024, which operationalised these rules. Regulation 30A and Clause 5A require listed companies to disclose certain types of agreements even if the entity is not a direct party, if such agreements impact the company's management, control, or impose any restriction or liability. The petitioners have also challenged Regulation 30(13), which requires listed entities to promptly disclose significant communications received from regulatory, statutory, enforcement, or judicial authorities. 'The regulations run contrary to the basic principle of 'consent' or 'consensus ad idem'—a pre-condition to formation of a contract under the Indian Contract Act,' the companies have stated in their petitions. The legal actions come amid the ongoing Kirloskar family feud over a 2009 'Deed of Family Settlement' (DFS), a private arrangement that outlined the distribution of control, management, and ownership across various Kirloskar companies among family branches. Sanjay Kirloskar-led Kirloskar Brothers Ltd, a listed entity from the Kirloskar Group, has demanded that Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd (KOEL) and other group firms disclose the DFS under Regulation 30A. KOEL maintains it is not a party to the DFS and therefore should not be compelled to disclose it. Sebi, in a communication issued in December 2024, had advised KOEL to disclose the DFS, stating that the document 'remains subsisting in nature and indirectly imposes restrictions' on the company. In their petitions, the listed Kirloskar Group companies have argued that Sebi's disclosure rules violated well-established principles of company law and contract law, including the doctrine of privity and a board's exclusive authority over decisions binding a company. Sebi's move also raised concerns over unintended consequences and unreasonable outcomes, such as being forced to disclose agreements made by unrelated or disgruntled individuals, they said. 'It envisages absurd and unreasonable circumstances where… any employee (at whatever post or even a disgruntled employee)… can bind a listed entity to an agreement… merely upon informing the listed entity of such agreement,' the petitioners stated. They also argued that Sebi was encroaching on the domain of civil courts. 'By interpreting disputed agreements which are in fact sub judice… Sebi is assuming the role of a civil court… and encroaches on the jurisdiction of the civil court,' the petitions state. Kirloskar Brothers Ltd (KBL) has filed an intervention application arguing that several other listed companies—such asHikal Ltd,DCM Ltd,TVS Motor Co. Ltd, andAdani Wilmar Ltd—have already complied with Sebi's disclosure requirements without challenging the regulation's legality. "Given that the regulation has already been acted upon and complied with by multiple listed entities… there exists no justifiable basis for the companies for challenging its constitutional validity at this belated stage apart from the petitioners' mala fide motives,' KBL's application states. Vishwanath Iyer, partner at law firm Anand Sharma and Associates, said calling Regulation 30A as 'unconstitutional' was a stretch. 'Courts have repeatedly affirmed Sebi's wide rule-making power over listed companies. Earlier precedents make it clear that a mere requirement to place a decades-old family deed on the stock exchange website is nowhere near a violation of fundamental rights,' Iyer said. 'It is unusual that a listed company is claiming Sebi's LODR guidelines as unconstitutional. The Bombay High Court is likely to ask why a company that benefits from public markets thinks it can opt out of the transparency bargain that every other issuer accepts,' he added.
