EU still seeks US trade deal but urged to toughen stance
The European Union remains hopeful of reaching a trade agreement with the United States despite President Donald Trump's intensified threat of 30% tariffs, the bloc's trade chief said Monday, amid growing pressure on Brussels to adopt a firmer stance.
European Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic's remarks came as EU ministers agreed on Monday to prioritise negotiations with the United States to avoid the levies that the trade chief said would wreck transatlantic trade.
Trump threw months of painstaking talks into disarray on Saturday by announcing he would hammer the bloc with the sweeping tariffs if no agreement is reached by Aug. 1.
Heading into Brussels talks with EU trade ministers, Sefcovic said despite Trump's latest threat, he 'felt' Washington was ready to continue negotiating – and he planned to speak with his U.S. counterparts later in the day.Sefcovic, who is leading talks on behalf of the EU's 27 states, said reaching a deal remained the priority – while acknowledging calls from countries including key power France for the bloc to flex its muscles in negotiations.
'The current uncertainty caused by unjustified tariffs cannot persist indefinitely,' Sefcovic told reporters, adding the EU was preparing for 'all outcomes,' including 'well-considered, proportionate countermeasures.' A 30% tariff rate would make it almost impossible to continue trading as before, with enormous consequences for supply chains and negative impacts on both sides of the Atlantic.
'And therefore I think we have to do, and I will definitely do, everything I can to prevent this super-negative scenario,' Sefcovic told reporters before the meeting on Monday.
European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen on Sunday delayed a package of retaliatory measures over U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminium – a day before they were set to kick in – as a sign of goodwill.
But diplomats said an additional package of reprisal measures would be presented to trade ministers Monday that could be rolled out if Trump imposes the 30% tariffs.
The EU threatened in May to target a much bigger swathe of U.S. goods, including cars and planes, if talks fail. Diplomats said the finalized list was expected to be worth 72 billion euros ($84.2 billion).
France's Trade Minister Laurent Saint-Martin said retaliation plans should be drawn up with 'no taboos,' adding the weekend's setback called for a rethink of the bloc's tactics.
'If you hold anything back, you are not strengthening your hand in negotiations,' he said at the Brussels talks. 'Obviously, the situation since Saturday requires us to change our strategy.' Denmark's Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen, whose country currently holds the EU presidency, said Brussels needed to show its strength.
'We don't want any kind of trade war with the U.S. ... we don't want to escalate things,' he said.'We want a deal, but there's an old saying: 'if you want peace, you have to prepare for war,'' he said ahead of the talks.
EU nations – some of which export far more to the United States than others – have sought to stay on the same page over how strong a line to take with Washington in order to get a deal.French President Emmanuel Macron on Saturday urged von der Leyen's commission to 'resolutely defend European interests' and said the EU should step up preparation for countermeasures.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz agreed and said he had spoken to Macron, Trump and von der Leyen in the past few days and would 'engage intensively' to try to find a solution.Brussels had readied duties on U.S. goods worth around 21 billion euros in response to the levies Trump slapped on metal imports earlier this year.
But it held off on those measures to give space to find a broader trade agreement – and has now suspended them again until early August.
Since returning to the presidency in January, Trump has unleashed sweeping stop-start tariffs on allies and competitors alike, roiling financial markets and raising fears of a global economic downturn.
But his administration faces pressure to secure deals with trading partners after promising a flurry of agreements.
So far, U.S. officials have only unveiled two pacts, with Britain and Vietnam, alongside temporarily lower tit-for-tat duties with China.
The EU, alongside dozens of other economies, had been set to see its U.S. tariff level increase from a baseline of 10% last Wednesday, but Trump pushed back the deadline to Aug. 1.
The EU tariff is markedly steeper than the 20% levy Trump unveiled in April – but paused initially until mid-July.
Thomas Byrne, the minister for Ireland, whose pharmaceutical industry puts it on the front line of Trump's trade war along with industrial powerhouse Germany, called for Europe to 'work our hardest' for a deal before Aug. 1.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
2 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Build regional stability from the ashes of Netanyahu's war on JCPOA
Ten years ago, on July 14, I joined my counterparts from China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union to announce the conclusion of a unique achievement of diplomacy, bringing a peaceful end to an unnecessary crisis founded on lies and a blatant policy of securitisation to divert global attention from the real nuclear threat to peace in West Asia. The entire world celebrated the conclusion of the Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), except for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other leaders in the Israeli nuclear apartheid regime, who saw – and continue to see – peace and stability as the only real 'existential threat', and who publicly pledged to destroy the deal. Today, some of our successors are clamouring to deal with the aftermath of an aggression against Iran, right in the middle of new nuclear negotiations. This aggression came from the rogue, non-NPT (the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) possessor of nuclear weapons in West Asia – Israel. It targeted safeguarded nuclear facilities of an NPT member and coupled the act with other war crimes by targeting civilian quarters, childcare centres, scientists, and off-duty military commanders. The butcher of Gaza went even further with Israel's latest aggression and broke a millennia-old tradition by targeting national leaders. This indicated a clear and publicly stated attempt to bring chaos and instability to the entire region. The only power to have ever used nuclear weapons – the US – rushed to the aid of this rogue aggressor as its campaign began to falter. In a reckless and unlawful move, it targeted Iran's nuclear facilities in a futile attempt to halt the country's peaceful nuclear progress – much of which, ironically, was achieved after the US unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA. At the same time, the successors of my E3/EU counterparts – the representatives of France, Germany, and the UK, along with the EU, have been simultaneously boasting about 'Netanyahu doing their dirty work', and threatening, in absolute bad faith, to invoke the 'dispute resolution mechanism' in the JCPOA and United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2231, which legally endorsed the nuclear deal. They do so while they have, in words and deeds, terminated their status as JCPOA participants by disavowing the most fundamental pillar of the JCPOA, in calling for the dismantlement of Iran's peaceful enrichment program – while embarrassingly failing to fulfil, even minimally, their own economic and financial obligations towards Iran through at least seven of the past 10 years. On July 20, 2021, I argued against the ability of the E3/EU to invoke the JCPOA 'dispute resolution mechanism' – erroneously and self-servingly called 'snapback', a term that was never used in the JCPOA or UNSC Resolution 2231 – in my 140-page letter to the Secretary-General of the UN, which was circulated as UN General Assembly (UNGA) document A/75/968 and Security Council document S/2021/669. My well-documented legal arguments have now been further strengthened by the more recent statements and actions of the E3/EU, in which they have clearly terminated their status as 'JCPOA Participants'. The Iranian armed forces, relying on home-grown military capability, have once again destroyed the myth of Israeli invincibility, exposing the thin skin of the bully. At the same time, the brave and proud Iranian people thwarted the delusion of Netanyahu and his cohorts to dismember Iran. Once again, Iran proved that even two nuclear powers, combined, cannot bring a millennia-old civilisation state to its knees. Nevertheless, it is now evident that Israel's illusion of regional supremacy and 'aggression at will' is founded on destabilising Iran, followed by other regional powers – resulting in instability, division, and chaos in Muslim West Asia. This is neither in the interest of the countries in the region nor of our friends in China and Russia, whose national interests are founded on stability; nor is it compatible with the US and Europe's global pivot agenda. Yet Netanyahu and his hypocritical 'Bibi-Firsters' in the West have shown that they are callous enough to engulf the world in 'forever wars' to prolong their corrupt political careers and expansionist delusions – founded on apartheid, genocide, and aggression against Arab neighbours in the region – coupled with blackmail, never-ending scandals, and extortion in the West. The international community needs to immediately address this fundamental threat to regional and global peace and security, which also endangers the national interests of almost all countries and the prosperity and welfare of the people of the region and beyond. I have personally witnessed, in more than four decades of diplomacy – including well-documented Israeli obstructions in the negotiations for the exchange of American hostages in Lebanon with Lebanese and Palestinian hostages in Israel in 1991 – that the Israeli political establishment has been, and always will be, willing to sacrifice the treasure, freedom, and blood of its closest allies for even the most trivial gains. Anyone harbouring the illusion that Israel will provide them with help and security will one day wake up to the ugly reality that they have been ruthlessly erected as Israel's first line of defence, without any reciprocity. The essential pillar of Netanyahu's policy is chaos, discord, and instability. The only real 'existential threat' – to him – is regional cooperation: Be it the establishment of a zone free from nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East – called for by the UNGA consistently since 1974 – or the establishment of a regional security and cooperation scheme in the Strait of Hormuz region, called for in paragraph 8 of Security Council Resolution 598 in 1987. As Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, the former prime minister of Qatar, has warned, our region – and indeed the entire world, including the permanent members of the Security Council – cannot prosper under the persistent shadow of Israeli domestic politics driving regional adventurism. It is high time for the UNSC to take practical measures to create a regional framework for dialogue, confidence-building, and cooperation among countries of the Hormuz region or Muslim West Asia, with a proper umbrella of global guarantees from the UNSC and its permanent members. Iran has offered ideas such as the Hormuz Peace Endeavour (HOPE) in 2019 or the Muslim West Asian Dialogue Association (MWADA) in 2024. Everyone in our region and beyond has a very high stake in thwarting the agenda of regional destabilisation. Other countries in the HOPE or MWADA region, including Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkiye, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen, who have now seen some of the horrifying realities of Israel's concocted dangerous future, should take the matter in their own hands, present individual or joint initiatives, improve Iranian proposals or provide plans of their own, and collectively and without further delay ask the UNSC to adopt a resolution for regional arrangements drafted primarily by the countries of this region. The lesson of the past 10 years since the conclusion of JCPOA must have illustrated to everyone that coercion will ultimately harm even its initiators. Diplomacy for a future of common vision, hope and positive-sum outcome is, has always been, and will forever remain the only reasonable way. Time is of the essence. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
2 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump threatens tariffs in 50 days: What harm will it do to Russia?
United States President Donald Trump has threatened to impose steep trading restrictions on Russia unless a peace deal with Ukraine is reached within 50 days, as he announced an agreement with NATO allies to send more weapons to Kyiv. The announcements on Monday marked a shift in US foreign policy as Trump's endorsement of Ukraine comes just weeks after Washington announced it would pause weapons sales to Kyiv. But Trump has expressed increasing frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin and hopes that tariffs and sanctions, as well as new deals for Patriot air defence missiles, will help bring an end to Russia's more than three-year invasion of Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Telegram that he had spoken to Trump and 'thanked him for his readiness to support Ukraine and to continue working together to stop the killings and establish a lasting and just peace'. On Tuesday, Russia's top security official, Dmitry Medvedev, said the Kremlin did not care about the 'theatrical ultimatum' issued by Trump, adding that Putin will comment on the US proposals if he deems it necessary to do so. What did Trump say? Sitting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at the White House, Trump told reporters he was disappointed in Putin and that billions of dollars of US weapons would go to Ukraine. In recent days, Russia has launched hundreds of drones to attack Ukrainian cities, angering Trump, who had accused Putin on July 8 of throwing a lot of 'b*******' at the US. Trump has said that his shift was motivated by frustration with the Russian president. 'My conversations with him [Putin] are always very pleasant… and then the missiles go off at night,' he followed up on Monday. 'We're going to make top-of-the-line weapons, and they'll be sent to NATO,' Trump said, adding that NATO would pay for them. For his part, Rutte said that Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands and Norway want to be part of the weapons deal. Trump also said that 'we're going to be doing very severe tariffs [on Russia] if we don't have a deal in 50 days'. Putin has yet to accept a proposal from Trump for an unconditional ceasefire, which was quickly endorsed by Kyiv. Trump also said US tariffs on Russian exports would be priced 'at about 100 percent' and then threatened 'secondary tariffs [otherwise known as secondary sanctions]'. Secondary sanctions, which would be far more punishing than US tariffs, would be levied on any country that trades with Moscow, targeting its commodities business in particular. What is Trump's tariff threat to Russia? Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Western countries – including the US, the United Kingdom, and European Union nations – have imposed 21,692 sanctions on Russia, most against individuals. Key sanctions on Moscow include import bans on Russian oil, a price cap on Russian fuel, and the freezing of Russian central bank assets held in European financial institutions. But the threat to impose so-called secondary sanctions, if carried out, would mark a notable shift. So far, Group of Seven (G7) member states have held back from taking steps that would restrict Russia from selling its fossil fuels elsewhere, to key buyers like China and India. Lawmakers from both US political parties are pushing for a bill – the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 – that would target other countries that buy Russian oil and gas. The bill would give Trump the authority to impose 500 percent tariffs on any country that helps Russia. US senators are reportedly waiting on Trump's OK to move the bill forward. Trump could also impose secondary tariffs through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which lets the president restrict trade in the event of a national emergency. Elsewhere, EU countries are close to reaching an agreement on a new package of sanctions against Russia, the bloc's foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said on Tuesday. 'We hope to reach a political agreement on the 18th sanctions package,' Kallas said before a meeting with foreign affairs ministers from the 27 EU countries in Brussels. How dependent is Russia's economy on fossil fuels? Fossil fuel sales still generate substantial revenue for the Kremlin. Seaborne oil revenues, for instance, dropped modestly in 2024 but stayed at near pre-war levels. This is due to Russia's 'shadow fleet' – ships with opaque ownership structures and no Western ties in terms of finance or insurance, allowing them to bypass Western sanctions. So, while G7 sanctions have reduced Moscow's margins and increased export costs, they haven't cut volumes to importing nations. From 2022 to 2025, China has purchased almost half of Russia's total crude oil exports (roughly 5 million barrels per day), with India following closely behind at nearly 40 percent. Both countries also import a large amount of Russian coal. Other importing nations include Brazil, Turkiye and Egypt. The EU, meanwhile, continues to consume large amounts of Russian natural gas, though Brussels has stated it wants to terminate all its contracts by 2027. As for the US itself, higher tariffs on Russian goods would have little impact – exports to the US totalled just $3bn in 2024, or 0.7 percent of Russia's total exports. While fossil fuels now contribute less to Russia's gross domestic product (GDP) than pre-invasion, Moscow's dependence on energy products remains high. Estimates vary, but fossil fuels still make up 55 percent of Russian export revenues and 16 percent of its GDP (roughly $280bn) That compares with 60 percent and 18 percent, respectively, before Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 – a small drop. How much could Trump's sanctions threat hurt Moscow? A sharp decline in Russian energy flows from secondary sanctions would almost certainly lead to higher global prices, particularly for natural gas. 'The impact would probably be greater on natural gas prices than oil,' said Kieran Tompkins, senior climate and commodities economist at Capital Economics, in a note. He pointed out that 'the oil market appears to have sufficient spare capacity to more or less offset a loss of Russian exports', owing to untapped OPEC supplies. However, he pointed out that 'knocking out half of Russia's crude and petroleum exports [on the back of Trump's threat] could reduce export revenues by $75bn or so.' In turn, Tompkins said that could induce a 'fiscal crisis' in Russia, leading to 'debt issuance ramping up, bond yields spiking and pressure for widespread fiscal tightening.' Looking ahead, Trump's 50-day proposal will give Moscow some time to come up with counterproposals and delay the implementation of sanctions. But Trump will be hoping that the threat of sanctions will influence Putin to put an end to hostilities.
Qatar Tribune
18 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Bitcoin tops $123K as US kicks off ‘Crypto Week'
Agencies Bitcoisn crossed the $120,000 for the first time on Monday, marking a new milestone for the world's largest cryptocurrency as investors bet on long-sought policy wins for the industry this week. Bitcoin scaled a record high of $123,153.22 before pulling back slightly to trade 2.4% higher around $122,000. Later in the day, the U.S. House of Representatives will debate a series of bills to provide the digital asset industry with the nation's regulatory framework it has long demanded. Those demands have resonated with U.S. President Donald Trump, who has called himself the 'crypto president' and urged policymakers to revamp rules in favor of the industry. 'It's riding a number of tailwinds at the moment,' said IG market analyst Tony Sycamore, citing strong institutional demand, expectations of further gains and support from Trump as reasons for the bullishness. 'It's been a very, very, strong move over the past six or seven days and it's hard to see where it stops now. It looks like it can easily have a look at the $125,000 level,' he said. The surge in bitcoin, which is up 30% for the year so far, has sparked a broader rally across other cryptocurrencies over the past few sessions, even in the face of Trump's chaotic tariffs. Ether, the second-largest token, scaled a more than five-month high of $3,059.60, while XRP and Solana gained about 3% each. The sector's total market value has swelled to about $3.81 trillion, according to data from CoinMarketCap. 'What we find interesting and are watching closely are the signs that bitcoin is now being seen as a long-term reserve asset, not just by retail investors and institutions but even some central banks,' said Gracie Lin, OKX's Singapore CEO. 'We're also seeing increasing participation from Asia-based investors, including family offices and wealth managers. These are strong signs of bitcoin's role in the global financial system and the structural shift in how it is perceived, suggesting that this isn't just another hype-driven rally.' Earlier this month, Washington declared the week of July 14 as 'Crypto Week,' during which members of Congress are set to vote on the Genius Act, the Clarity Act, and the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act. The most significant bill is the 'Genius Act,' which would create federal rules for stablecoins. Elsewhere, prices of crypto stocks and exchange-traded funds (ETFs) advanced. In U.S. premarket trading, shares of crypto exchange Coinbase surged 1.7%, while bitcoin holder Strategy climbed 3.3%. Crypto miner Mara Holdings jumped 4.6%. Hong Kong-listed spot bitcoin ETFs launched by China AMC, Harvest and Bosera all hit record highs.
