Spain's leader sticks by decision to break with NATO spending goal despite Trump tariff threats
MADRID (AP) — Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez walked away from this week's NATO summit with an opt-out from spending more on defense. He also left with fresh threats of tariffs from U.S. President Donald Trump.
On Thursday, the progressive Spanish leader stuck by his decision to break with NATO allies and responded to Trump's comments by pointing out that the European Commission — and not Spain — was who decided the bloc's trade policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
16 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
US signs agreements with Guatemala and Honduras to take asylum seekers
GUATEMALA CITY (AP) — Guatemala and Honduras have signed agreements with the United States to potentially offer refuge to people from other countries who otherwise would seek asylum in the United States, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Thursday at the conclusion of her Central America trip. The agreements expand the Trump administration's efforts to provide the U.S. government flexibility in returning migrants not only to their own countries, but also to third countries as it attempts to ramp up deportations. Noem described it as a way to offer asylum-seekers options other than coming to the United States. She said the agreements had been in the works for months. with the U.S. government applying pressure on Honduras and Guatemala to get them done. 'Honduras and now Guatemala after today will be countries that will take those individuals and give them refugee status as well,' Noem said. 'We've never believed that the United States should be the only option, that the guarantee for a refugee is that they go somewhere to be safe and to be protected from whatever threat they face in their country. It doesn't necessarily have to be the United States.' During U.S. President Donald Trump's first term, the U.S. signed such accords called safe-third country agreements with Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. They effectively allowed the U.S. to declare some asylum seekers ineligible to apply for U.S. protection and permitted the U.S. government to send them to those countries deemed 'safe.' The U.S. has had such an agreement with Canada since 2002. The practical challenge was that all three Central American countries at the time were seeing large numbers of their own citizens head to the U.S. to escape violence and a lack of economic opportunity. They also had extremely under-resourced asylum systems. In February, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio signed deals with El Salvador and Guatemala that allowed the U.S. to send migrants from other nations there. But in Guatemala's case it was to only be a point of transit for migrants who would then return to their homelands, not to apply for asylum there. And in El Salvador, it was broader, allowing the U.S. to send migrants to be imprisoned there. Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum said Tuesday that Mexico would not sign a third safe country agreement, but at the same time Mexico has accepted more than 5,000 migrants from other countries deported from the U.S. since Trump took office. She said Mexico accepted them for humanitarian reasons and helped them return to their home countries. The U.S. also has agreements with Panama and Costa Rica to take migrants from other countries though so far the numbers sent have been relatively small. The Trump administration sent 299 to Panama in February and fewer than 200 to Costa Rica. The agreements give U.S. authorities options, especially for migrants from countries where it is not easy for the U.S. to return them directly. __ Sherman reported from Mexico City.
Winnipeg Free Press
16 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
North Dakota considers 2 proposed natural gas pipelines that would stretch across the state
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — A state official briefed regulators Thursday on two separate underground pipelines that companies plan to build across hundreds of miles of North Dakota, bringing natural gas from the oil fields in the west to mostly industrial users in the more populated east. Both pipelines — one by Intensity Infrastructure Partners and Rainbow Energy Center, the other by WBI Energy — would span about 350 miles (563 kilometers) roughly from the Watford City to Fargo areas. Segments would come into service in 2029 and 2030. The companies didn't disclose the projects' costs. The presentation to a state industrial panel of elected officials was among the first steps in a process for the state to sign on with a 10-year, $50 million-per-year line of credit. That is essentially a backstop so projects can proceed with the intent that the state back out one day when other users join. Companies won't build a pipeline without firm commitments from users. North Dakota has a critical need for more natural gas transportation as oil wells age and produce more natural gas relative to oil, North Dakota Pipeline Authority Director Justin Kringstad said. Republican Gov. Kelly Armstrong welcomed the projects for helping oil production, which is a huge driver of the state budget. 'If you can't move your gas and you have a finite amount of capital to invest in drilling, you're going to drill where you can market your gas, or you're going to do it in a different manner,' the governor said. 'So being able to move gas out of the Bakken (oil region) will help produce more oil.' North Dakota is producing a near-record 3.5 billion cubic feet (99.1 million cubic liters) per day of natural gas. The state has long wanted such pipelines, but efforts never succeeded in the past because of developments that hurt demand, such as oil price declines and the COVID-19 pandemic, Kringstad said. 'Today we're seeing a much stronger pull on the demand side than we've ever seen in these efforts,' Kringstad said. 'We've always seen the push and the need in the west, but today the appetite across the state for natural gas and for energy is at the highest that I've ever seen.' The gas will mostly be used for industrial purposes but also growing residential needs, he said. The pipelines could carry as much as 1 million dekatherms per day, a volume he said would be 'extremely meaningful in addressing the challenges that North Dakota is facing.' Capturing and moving the gas out of the oil field has been an issue over the years as officials and industry have sought to boost infrastructure and reduce flaring, or the burning of natural gas into the air. Although the state captured about 96% of the gas in April, critics have long raised environmental and health concerns about flaring. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. The Trump administration has pushed for increased domestic energy production, largely from fossil fuel sources. Doug Burgum, a former North Dakota governor and now the U.S. Interior secretary, has long called for raising energy extraction efforts. Other pipeline projects in North Dakota have drawn enormous pushback in recent years, including huge protests of the Dakota Access oil pipeline and landowner resistance around the Midwest to Summit Carbon Solutions' proposed carbon dioxide network. Armstrong said some degree of pushback is likely, 'but the reality is pipelines are the easiest way to move things.' It's unclear whether eminent domain, or the taking of private property with just compensation, will come into play for the pipelines. A Rainbow Enegry Center leader said Intensity Infrastructure Partners has never utilized eminent domain in more than 2,000 miles (3,200 kilometers) of pipeline it has built in North Dakota. A WBI Energy spokesperson said he couldn't answer. Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions has faced intense opposition over eminent domain for its proposed five-state carbon dioxide pipeline. Some landowners have opposed eminent domain as the company seeks to build the pipeline, and South Dakota's governor earlier this year signed a ban on eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines.
Toronto Star
22 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Senators diverge sharply on damage done by Iran strikes after classified briefing
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senators emerged from a classified briefing Thursday with sharply diverging assessments of President Donald Trump's bombing of three Iranian nuclear sites, with Republicans calling the mission a clear success and Democrats expressing deep skepticism. CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, came to Capitol Hill to give the classified briefings, originally scheduled for Tuesday.
