Nobody is welcoming tariffs ‘with open arms', says Irish premier
Despite suggestions from US President Donald Trump, he said his understanding was that the 15% tariff on pharmaceutical exports also represented 'a ceiling' rate.
Speaking to the media at Government Buildings in Dublin on Monday, Mr Martin said the US tariffs are 'not Brexit' and the approach for supporting businesses had to be 'strategic and not a handout'.
He said what effect the new trading arrangements would have on October's budget would be decided closer to the time.
US President Donald Trump is visiting Scotland (PA)
'It's important to say that Europe never sought tariffs, or never sought to impose tariffs, and fundamentally, we are against tariffs: we believe in an open trading economy,' he said.
'New realities are in play and so at a broader level, the stability and predictability that this agreement brings is important for businesses, is important for consumers and indeed patients when it comes to the manufacturing and distribution of medicines,' he said.
'In essence, we have avoided a trade conflict here which would have been ruinous, which would have been very damaging to our economy, and to jobs in particular.
'The challenge now for Europe is to work on its own inefficiencies, to reduce barriers within the single market, to press ahead more ambitiously and more proactively on trade diversification and trade deals with other countries that would facilitate that market diversification that is required.
'Meanwhile, there is much to be negotiated in the aftermath of this framework agreement.'
The EU is to have 15% tariffs imposed on most of its goods including cars, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals entering the US, with no new tariffs on US goods coming into the bloc.
There will be 'zero for zero' tariffs on a number of products including aircraft, some agricultural goods and certain chemicals – as well as EU purchases of US energy worth 750 billion dollars (£560 billion) over three years.
There is a mixed reaction to the deal across the EU, with French minister Benjamin Haddad calling the deal 'unbalanced' and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban stating that Donald Trump 'ate European Commission President Ursula) von der Leyen for breakfast'.
Ireland's junior minister at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Neale Richmond, said the deal was the least worst option.
'We're not exactly celebrating this, it's not a case that this is a good thing but it's probably the least bad option based on what we were facing a couple of days ago, the prospect of a 30% tariff,' he told the BBC.
Asked about mixed reactions to the deal from heads of government across Europe, Mr Martin said: 'Nobody is welcoming tariffs with open arms.
'I think we've been consistent in saying that we don't agree with tariffs, that we prefer if there weren't tariffs, but we have to deal with realities.
'I understand people criticising, but given the balance and the options here … in my view, I would appreciate the work of the (European) Commission in this regard, and the avoidance of a trade war is preferable, in my view, and that's the key issue.'
He added: 'It's easy to put the chin out in life, but sometimes it's wiser to box more cautiously and to negotiate wisely and to think of the bigger picture, and I think that's what President von der Leyen and Maros Sefcovic have done on this occasion.'
Asked about whether the 9.4 billion euro that the government announced last week would be spent in the budget would be cut back, Mr Martin said they would better understand the implications closer to the budget being unveiled in October.
'It's difficult at this early stage to calculate the impact of these tariffs in terms of government revenues, or indeed in terms of the prospects for 2026, so we will do further analysis of that.'
He said he did not believe Irish companies would lose access to the US market as a result of the tariff rate.
He added: 'This is not Brexit, and I would caution in terms of just creating funds in themselves.
'I think more importantly, we have to take decisions now that would create the opportunity or the landscape for companies to grow and to develop strongly, to become more energy efficient, in terms of research and development supports.
'It has to be a strategic approach, not a handout approach.'
Responding, chief executive of business group Ibec Danny McCoy said he believed Europe had 'capitulated' to get a deal, but said if they had negotiated harder 'we could have damaged ourselves a lot more than we anticipated'.
He said there would be 'hard cases' and job losses in Ireland under a 15% tariff, and was 'surprised' the government was not open to Brexit or Covid-level supports for businesses.
'It's not going to be a catastrophe, we're more resistant than that, but for some industries, going back to the point around the Brexit-type adjustment fund, you need to be sensitive there will be some areas that actually could find this devastating.'
Mr Martin said it was 'vital' that the EU pushes ahead with the expansion of the European single market to reduce barriers in a number of sectors that 'are way beyond the value of the tariffs'.
He said it was not clear yet what impact the tariff differential on the island of Ireland would have, as there is a 10% tariff in place in Northern Ireland.
'In terms of the north-south, again, the detail will be important here and its early days yet to be reading too much into that differential, because ours are not stacked, whereas some in the north would be, so these are complex issues that have to be worked out.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
8 minutes ago
- Reuters
Exclusive: Shippers ask to end contracts with Russian-backed refiner Nayara, sources say
NEW DELHI, July 29 (Reuters) - The owners of three vessels chartered by India's Nayara Energy have asked to end their contracts with company, six sources familiar with the matter said on Tuesday, under pressure from EU sanctions imposed on the Russian-owned refiner. Nayara, majority-owned by Russian entities including oil major Rosneft ( opens new tab, runs India's third-biggest refinery and exports refined products and also supplies them domestically. Fresh European Union sanctions unveiled on July 18 that target Russia and its energy sector over Moscow's war in Ukraine, have been increasingly disruptive to Nayara. Reuters earlier reported it has been forced to reduce operations at its 400,000-barrels-per-day refinery due to fuel storage constraints. India-based Seven Islands Shipping Ltd ( opens new tab and Great Eastern Shipping Co ( opens new tab (GESCO) have asked Nayara to release the three clean products tankers from their contracts, citing concerns over the sanctions, five of the sources told Reuters. Seven Islands is seeking the release of its medium-range vessels Bourbon and Courage, while GESCO has sought the return of the Jag Pooja, the sources said. The sources declined to be named as they were not authorised to speak to the media. Mumbai-based Nayara did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. It has previously criticised the EU sanctions, calling them "unjust and unilateral". Seven Islands and GESCO did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Bourbon is anchored near Vadinar port in western India, where Nayara's refinery is based, while Courage and Jag Pooja are floating off Kochi and Ennore ports, respectively, data from analytics firm Kpler showed. Another tanker, Sanmar Songbird, chartered by Indian state refiner Hindustan Petroleum Corp ( opens new tab, was scheduled to load gasoline from Nayara on Tuesday, according to three sources and LSEG data. But it has since been diverted to load from Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd ( opens new tab, sources said. The diversion was due to the sanctions and the lack of available insurance cover for the voyage, they said. HPCL and Sanmar did not immediately respond to requests for comment. India has become the biggest importer of Russian seaborne crude since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in early 2022. Last week, Reuters reported that a tanker carrying Russian Urals crude was diverted from Nayara's Vadinar port following the EU sanctions announcement, while two other tankers skipped loading refined products there. Nayara's CEO resigned in the wake of the new sanctions, and the company filed a court case in India against Microsoft (MSFT.O), opens new tab after the U.S. software giant suspended services to the firm.
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
What would UK recognition of Palestine as a state actually mean?
The UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire and a two-state solution in Gaza, Sir Keir Starmer has vowed. The prime minister said Benjamin Netanyahu's government must end its starvation tactics and allow the supply of aid into the embattled enclave after a UN-backed food security body said the 'worst-case scenario of famine' was playing out in the territory. The announcement on Tuesday came after an emergency virtual cabinet meeting where Sir Keir laid out his plan for peace in the Middle East, agreed over the weekend with French President Emmanuel Macron and German chancellor Friedrich Merz. Sir Keir has come under mounting pressure from his own party to recognise a Palestinian state, which has only grown since President Emmanuel Macron announced France's intention to do so by September. It comes as British foreign secretary David Lammy is attending a United Nations conference in New York on Tuesday to urge support for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. Here, The Independent asks experts about what the UK recognising Palestinian statehood would mean in practice. What would UK recognition of Palestine as a state mean? Dr Julie Norman, an associate professor at UCL specialising in Middle Eastern politics, said it looks likely that the UK will recognise Palestine as a state, which would mean voting for this at the United Nations (UN) – but it would be unlikely the UN would recognise Palestinian statehood due to the probability of the United States blocking the move. However, she said countries such as the UK and France voting for recognition at the UN would be a 'significant' move. And she said the UK officially recognising Palestinian statehood would still be of 'value', even if the reality is that not much would change on the ground, with Israel still 'fully rejecting' the prospect of recognition. Speaking of British recognition, Dr Norman said: 'It would be a strong moral commitment and stance to Palestine at a moment when it's never been more fraught in Gaza and the West Bank. 'In the short term, it's a diplomatic stance, and it makes room for policy changes. 'And, if and when parties come back to discuss the long-term conflict, it would put Palestine in a better position. So it wouldn't change things immediately, but I would say it still has value.' She added that the move might initially see more change in London than in Ramallah, a city in the central West Bank, which serves as the administrative capital of Palestine – with, for example, the opening of an embassy in the UK capital. This would not mean recognition of Hamas. What is the two-state solution? The idea of dividing the Holy Land goes back decades. When the British mandate over Palestine ended, the UN partition plan in 1947 envisioned dividing the territory into Jewish and Arab states. Upon Israel's declaration of independence the following year, war erupted with its Arab neighbours and the plan was never implemented. Over half of the Palestinian population fled or were forced to flee. Under a 1949 armistice, Jordan held control over the West Bank and east Jerusalem and Egypt over Gaza. Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians seek these lands for a future independent state, and the idea of a two-state solution based on Israel's pre-1967 boundaries has been the basis of peace talks dating back to the 1990s. The two-state solution has wide international support, but there is disagreement about how it would be implemented. Israel's creation and expansion of settlements in the Occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law, are seen as a major obstacle to this. What would recognition of Palestine as a state mean for refugees? Sir Vincent Fean, a former British Consul General to Jerusalem and now a trustee of the charity Britain Palestine Project, explained that recognition of Palestine as a state would mean that if Palestinian passports were issued, they would subsequently be recognised by the UK as passports of a state. However, Sir Vincent said Palestinian statehood would not affect the UK's refugee system. 'Does it impact the tally of refugees coming to the UK? No,' he said. This is because he expects the visa regime the UK currently has with Palestine – where travel is only allowed between the two after a successful visa application – would continue. He added that Palestinian statehood 'wouldn't particularly change the right of return for Palestinians to their homeland'. He said this was a 'long-standing right', although it would require negotiation with Israel. What does UK recognition of Palestinian statehood mean for how the two would communicate? Sir Vincent said this was a 'very important point' to clarify, as he highlighted the distinction between recognising the entity of Palestine and recognising factions of government. He said: 'It's important to say the British government doesn't recognise governments, it recognises states. 'So it isn't actually recognising President [Mahmoud] Abbas as head of the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organisation] and head of the Palestinian Authority. 'In practice, he would be the interlocutor in Ramallah, because there isn't an alternative.' He stressed, however, that Britain has already proscribed Hamas as a terrorist group and that this would not change. Dr Norman added that the Palestinian Authority is currently the main governing entity for Palestinians in the West Bank, which the UK has recognised and had lines of communication with for a long time. If Britain were to recognise Palestinian statehood, this would not change and would continue. Sir Vincent also said that the prospect of Hamas running Palestine next is 'practically zero' because the militants' chances of winning an election are 'remote'. He said the plan for the future governance of Gaza involving the Palestinian Authority will be a focus of the UN meeting being held this week. What countries have recognised Palestinian statehood? France has become the latest country to announce it will recognise Palestinian statehood, drawing angry rebukes from Israel and the United States and opening the door for other major nations to perhaps follow suit. Mr Macron last week published a letter sent to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas confirming France's intention to press ahead with recognition and work to convince other partners to do the same. He said he would make a formal announcement at the United Nations General Assembly next month. France is now the first major Western country to shift its diplomatic stance on a Palestinian state, after Spain, Ireland, and Norway officially recognised it last year. The three countries made the declaration and agreed its borders would be demarcated as they were before the 1967 Middle East war, when Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. However, they also recognised that those borders may change if a final settlement is reached over the territory, and that their decisions did not diminish their belief in Israel's fundamental right to exist in peace and security. About 144 of the 193 UN member states recognise Palestine as a state, including most of the global south as well as Russia, China and India. But only a handful of the 27 European Union members do so, mostly former Communist countries as well as Sweden and Cyprus. The UN General Assembly approved the de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine in November 2012 by upgrading its observer status at the world body to "non-member state" from 'entity'. What implications would UK recognition of Palestinian statehood have internationally? Dr Norman said: 'This is where it can be important'. Two major global powers, such as the UK and France, making the move would be 'significant' and would pave the way for conversations on the issue happening elsewhere, such as in Canada, she said. 'It starts isolating the US as the main major power backing Israel to the exclusion of Palestine,' she said. 'It makes them the exception and shows the rest of the world somewhat united in Palestinian self-determination, which has been the UK's policy for a while now. If we're serious about that, then we need to be serious about that. 'We don't have as much military weight as the US, but we do still have diplomatic weight, and we should use what we can. 'It would show Europe is committed to a two-state solution, and wouldn't let that disappear or sit in the back seat.'
The Guardian
10 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘The war needs to end': Is the US right turning on Israel?
As the Israel-Gaza war nears its two-year mark, and as images of starving people and utter devastation flood social media, cracks seem to be emerging in the American right's typically iron-clad support for Israel. The US continues to support Israel diplomatically and militarily, and last Thursday pulled out of peace negotiations that it accused Hamas of sabotaging. And in the US Congress, only two Republicans voted for a recent amendment that would have pulled funding for missile defense systems for Israel. Yet the war's duration and human cost, as well as recent Israeli strikes on Christian targets, have spurred modest signs of discontent on the US right. Some conservative commentators have walked back their support for Israel's war; the US's famously Zionist ambassador to Israel rebuked the actions of Jewish settlers in the West Bank, and an unresolved rift over foreign intervention continues to plague the Maga world. To some extent this mirrors trends in US sentiment overall. A recent CNN poll found a steep decline in US support for Israel since the war started. That drop was most dramatic among respondents who identified as Democrats or independents, but the poll also found that since 2023 the percentage of surveyed Republicans who believe that Israel's actions are justified fell from 68% to 52%. It's highly likely that depictions of starvation in the territory – where 147 people have reportedly starved to death, including 88 children, and nearly one in three people are going multiple days without eating, according to the United Nations – have played a role. On Monday, Donald Trump partly contradicted Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu's claim that there is no starvation in Gaza, telling reporters: 'That's real starvation … I see it, and you can't fake that. So, we're going to be even more involved.' Trump made the statement while visiting Britain, where the Daily Express, considered the country's most rightwing mainstream tabloid, recently ran a headline decrying hunger in Gaza: 'FOR PITY'S SAKE STOP THIS NOW.' A recent spate of Israeli attacks on Christian targets in Gaza and the West Bank have also angered some American conservatives. Last Thursday, after an Israeli tank fired on the sole Catholic church in Gaza – killing three people and wounding nine, including a priest – a reportedly upset Trump called Netanyahu to complain. A few days after the church shelling, the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, visited Taybeh, a Palestinian Christian town in the West Bank that has been repeatedly attacked by Israeli settlers, who earlier this month set a fire near a fifth-century church. In a statement, Huckabee described the attack as 'an absolute travesty' and 'an act of terror' and called for the perpetrators to be prosecuted. (He did not directly implicate the Israeli government or settlers.) Although there have long been isolationist and populist elements on the right skeptical of the United States' close alliance with Israel, their point of view has been eclipsed in recent history by the pro-Israel camp, which enjoys strong support among American evangelical Christians. Huckabee is an evangelical Christian who has described himself as an 'unapologetic, unreformed Zionist'. Like many evangelicals, he believes that Israel has a divine claim to the West Bank, and has famously declared that 'there is no such thing as a Palestinian.' That Huckabee issued such a strong statement on Taybeh 'was surprising,' Todd Deatherage said. Deatherage is the co-founder of Telos, a non-profit that works to give US policymakers and religious groups a more nuanced understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Huckabee's gesture, he said, seems to indicate 'some complexity in a movement that didn't have complexity around this before'. Sohrab Ahmari, a conservative journalist and commentator, described Huckabee's statement as remarkable 'given how much of a kind of Boomer evangelical Huckabee is'. Huckabee also recently called for Israel to 'aggressively investigate' the murder of Sayfollah 'Saif' Musallet, a Palestinian American man who was recently beaten to death by settlers in the West Bank, according to his family. The events abroad also seem to have made ripples in the US conservative media sphere. The Israeli government said that the church strike was a battlefield mistake, but in a recent episode of his talk show, Michael Knowles, a rightwing American pundit, expressed skepticism. 'I've been broadly supportive of the state of Israel,' Knowles, who is Catholic, said in the segment. 'And you're losing me.' The Israeli government 'is really screwing up, is really not playing its cards right', he argued. 'The war needs to come to an end. How long is the war gonna go on?' He added: 'America is the only friend that Israel has on planet Earth. I do not get what the Israeli government is doing here, but I suspect there will be political consequences – as there should be.' Some critics in the comments section of Knowles' video accused him of only noticing deaths in Gaza once the victims were conspicuously Christian. The Free Press, the online publication founded by Bari Weiss to challenge what she describes as an establishment liberal media, recently published an article arguing that although past claims about hunger in Gaza were 'lies', the territory is now rapidly entering a 'real hunger crisis'. The Free Press has generally taken a fervently pro-Israel stance. Similarly, Joe Rogan, the everyman podcaster who threw his support to Trump in the last election, has refused to host Netanyahu on his podcast, the premier's son, Yair Netanyahu, claimed on Friday. And Ross Douthat, the conservative New York Times columnist, published an op-ed on Saturday arguing that Israel's military operation has crossed into being 'unjust'. Although the US right is perceived today as staunchly pro-Israel, recent history is more complicated, Deatherage noted; George HW Bush's Republican administration undertook a political fight with Israel about Jewish settlements in the West Bank. The right's pro-Israel stance really hardened after 9/11, he said, when Christian conservatives and defense hawks embraced the view that the US and Israel were allies against Islamic terror. The modern iteration of Christians United for Israel (CUFI) was founded in 2006 to facilitate US evangelical support for Israel. The organization's membership is significantly larger than Aipac, the pro-Israel organization founded by Jewish Americans. Trump's alliance with the religious right during his first term intensified the political power of Christian Zionism. 'That part of the evangelical movement really gained unprecedented access to being heard,' Deatherage said. Some Christian Zionists, particularly evangelicals, believe there are Biblical justifications for the US supporting Israel. A small subset believe that a showdown between Israel and enemy states could presage the End of Days, Daniel Hummel, a historian of Christian Zionism, said. The recent strike on Iran sparked apocalyptic speculation in some Christian circles, he noted. Yet polling data suggests a generational divide. Younger evangelicals, like younger Americans broadly, are more skeptical of Zionism, and the gap seems to be growing. A 2021 survey by researchers at the University of North Carolina at Pembroke found that only 33.6% of American evangelicals between the ages of 18 and 29 supported Israel, down from 69% surveyed in a similar poll in 2018. Research by the University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll has found similar shifts among younger evangelicals. 'Younger evangelicals in particular are kind of renegotiating what it means to be a Christian in the public square,' Deatherage said. 'And they're not thrilled by the bargain that the older generation maybe made with politics.' The topic of Christian Zionism came up during a heated episode of Tucker Carlson's talk show, this June, featuring Senator Ted Cruz. Carlson is one of the major faces of an America First camp in the Maga movement that views the American alliance with Israel with increasing suspicion. During the conversation, Cruz cited a Bible verse as one of the reasons that he supports Israel. Carlson responded by testily mocking the notion that foreign policy objectives should be determined by biblical exegesis. On the fringes, criticisms of Israel have sometimes been intertwined with outright antisemitism. The far-right pundit Candace Owens, for example, has often disparaged Israel in conspiratorial terms. Yet skepticism of Israel has also gained some credible intellectual traction on the more mainstream Maga right, particularly among a group of mostly younger conservative activists, political staffers and policy wonks sometimes known in Washington DC as the 'restrainers'. These are generally pro-Trump conservatives who, while not necessarily outright isolationists, believe that the US should protect its own national interests even if this means scaling back – or 'restraining' – allies such as Israel. The term is subjective and contentious, but the Pentagon's policy chief, Elbridge Colby; the deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East, Mike DiMino; and JD Vance himself are sometimes considered examples. Pro-Israel Republicans and hawks still mostly hold the whip hand, but Deatherage believes a political window for rethinking the US's relationship for Israel may be opening on the right. 'There's a lot of pressure on [Trump] to support whatever the Israeli government is doing. But there's now some really dissenting voices on the other side of that.'
