Germany's Merz says some US lawmakers have 'no idea' of scale of Russia's rearmament
Germany's Merz says some US lawmakers have 'no idea' of scale of Russia's rearmament
BERLIN - Some U.S. lawmakers do not understand the scale of Russia's rearmament campaign, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Friday, a day after he held talks with U.S. President Donald Trump in the White House.
"I met with some senators on Capitol Hill and told them to please look at the rearmament Russia is doing," Merz told a business conference in Berlin.
"They clearly have no idea what is happening there right now," he said, without identifying the senators.
Russia has shifted defence plants to round-the-clock production since the start of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and has signed arms deals with North Korea and Iran, prompting European officials to warn that Moscow could soon be in a position to attack NATO territory.
Russia denies any such intention and says it is waging a "special military operation" in Ukraine to protect its own security against what it casts as an aggressive, hostile West.
Merz, a conservative who took power in May, is the latest European leader to visit Trump hoping to convince him of the need to back Ukraine against Russia's invasion and continue to help underpin Europe's security through the NATO alliance.
Merz said he had been reassured by the words Trump had uttered during their public encounter in the Oval Office, especially the U.S. president's "resounding no" to a question on whether the United States had plans to withdraw from NATO.
European countries have been boosting defence spending since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, in the continent's bloodiest conflict since World War Two.
Merz has backed Trump's demand for NATO members to commit to a target of more than doubling defence spending to 5% of economic output in the future. Trump welcomed that commitment on Thursday and told Merz that U.S. forces would remain in Germany.
"Whether we like it or not," Merz said on Friday, "we will remain dependent on the United States... for a long time to come." REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
37 minutes ago
- Business Times
US, China to hold trade talks on June 9 in London; Trump says Xi agreed to let rare earth minerals flow to US
[WASHINGTON] US President Donald Trump said on Friday that Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to let rare earth minerals and magnets flow to the United States, a move that could lower tensions between the world's biggest economies. Asked by a reporter aboard Air Force One whether Xi had agreed to do so, Trump replied: 'Yes, he did.' The Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump's comment came one day after a rare call with Xi aimed at resolving trade tensions that have been brewing over the topic for weeks. At that time, Trump said there had been 'a very positive conclusion' to the talks, adding that 'there should no longer be any questions respecting the complexity of Rare Earth products.' In another sign of easing tensions over the issue, China has granted temporary export licenses to rare-earth suppliers of the top three US automakers, two sources familiar with the matter said. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Trump on Friday also said three of his cabinet officials will meet with representatives of China in London on June 9 to discuss a trade deal. In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said Treasury Scott Bessent, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, and United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will attend from the US side. 'The meeting should go very well,' Trump wrote. The countries struck an agreement on May 12 in Geneva, Switzerland, to roll back for 90 days most of the triple-digit, tit-for-tat tariffs they had placed on each other since Trump's January inauguration. Financial markets that had worried about trade disruptions rallied on the news. But China's decision in April to suspend exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets has continued to disrupt supplies needed by automakers, computer chip manufacturers and military contractors around the world. Trump had accused China of violating the Geneva agreement and ordered curbs on chip-design software and other shipments to China. Beijing rejected the claim and threatened counter measures. Rare earths and other critical minerals are a source of leverage for China as Trump could come under domestic political pressure if economic growth sags because companies cannot make mineral-powered products. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has repeatedly threatened an array of punitive measures on trading partners, only to revoke some of them at the last minute. The on-again, off-again approach has baffled world leaders and spooked business executives. REUTERS
Straits Times
42 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Harvard gets other universities' backing in Trump funding fight
Harvard sued in April, claiming the government freeze violates the university's First Amendment guarantee of free speech. PHOTO: BLOOMBERG BOSTON, Massachusetts – A group of 18 leading US research universities, including Princeton, MIT, Caltech and Johns Hopkins, asked a federal judge for permission to file legal arguments in support of Harvard University in its high-stakes showdown with the Trump administration over more than US$2 billion (S$2.58 billion) in frozen grant money. The institutions have all received millions of dollars from the federal government for research that has 'advanced scientific knowledge, safeguarded national security, strengthened the American economy, and saved countless lives,' they said in a court filing on June 6 in Harvard's lawsuit. Harvard sued in April, claiming the government freeze violates the university's First Amendment guarantee of free speech and federal law governing administrative rulemaking. The fight is part of a broad-based effort by President Donald Trump to force sweeping changes at Harvard and other elite US universities. The government has also frozen or is reviewing federal funding to Princeton, Cornell, Northwestern and Columbia universities, among others. Harvard claims in its suit, filed in Boston federal court, that the Trump administration illegally suspended its funding in retaliation for its refusal to bow to 'unconstitutional demands' to overhaul governance, discipline and hiring policies, as well as diversity programmes. The president claims Harvard, the nation's oldest and richest university, has failed to combat anti-Semitism on campus and encourage viewpoint diversity. 'The cuts will disrupt ongoing research, ruin experiments and datasets, destroy the careers of aspiring scientists, and deter long-term investments at universities across the country,' the universities said in a request to file amicus curiae or 'friend of the court' arguments supporting Harvard's case against the government. The request to support Harvard also comes from Boston University, Brown University, Colorado State University, Dartmouth College, Michigan State University, Oregon State University, Rice University, Rutgers University, Tufts University, University of Maryland at College Park, University of Oregon, University of Pennsylvania, University of Pittsburgh and Yale University. A group of states led by Massachusetts, where Harvard is located, also asked to file arguments in support of the university on June 6. BLOOMBERG Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
US Supreme Court allows Doge broad access to Social Security data
Two labour unions and an advocacy group sued to stop Doge from accessing sensitive data at the Social Security Administration. PHOTO: REUTERS WASHINGTON - The US Supreme Court on June 6 permitted the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), a key player in President Donald Trump's drive to slash the federal workforce, broad access to personal information on millions of Americans in Social Security Administration data systems while a legal challenge plays out. At the request of the Justice Department, the justices put on hold Maryland-based US District Judge Ellen Hollander's order that had largely blocked Doge's access to 'personally identifiable information' in data such as medical and financial records while litigation proceeds in a lower court. Ms Hollander found that allowing Doge unfettered access likely would violate a federal privacy law. The court's brief, unsigned order did not provide a rationale for siding with Doge. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal justices dissented from the order. Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a dissent that was joined by fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, criticised the court's majority for granting Doge 'unfettered data access' despite the administration's 'failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards.' In a separate order on June 6, the Supreme Court extended its block on judicial orders requiring Doge to turn over records to a government watchdog group that sought details on the entity established by Mr Trump and billionaire Elon Musk. Doge swept through federal agencies as part of the Republican president's effort, spearheaded by Mr Musk, to eliminate federal jobs, downsize and reshape the US government and root out what they see as wasteful spending. Mr Musk formally ended his government work on May 30. Two labour unions and an advocacy group sued to stop Doge from accessing sensitive data at the Social Security Administration, or SSA, including Social Security numbers, bank account data, tax information, earnings history and immigration records. The agency is a major provider of government benefits, sending cheques each month to more than 70 million recipients including retirees and disabled Americans. Democracy Forward, a liberal legal group that represented the plaintiffs, said June 6's order would put millions of Americans' data at risk. 'Elon Musk may have left Washington DC but his impact continues to harm millions of people,' the group said in a statement. 'We will continue to use every legal tool at our disposal to keep unelected bureaucrats from misusing the public's most sensitive data as this case moves forward.' In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that the Social Security Administration had been 'ransacked' and that Doge members had been installed without proper vetting or training and demanded access to some of the agency's most sensitive data systems. Ms Hollander in an April 17 ruling found that DogeOGE had failed to explain why its stated mission required 'unprecedented, unfettered access to virtually SSA's entire data systems.' 'For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records,' Ms Hollander wrote. 'This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation.' Ms Hollander issued a preliminary injunction that prohibited Doge staffers and anyone working with them from accessing data containing personal information, with only narrow exceptions. The judge's ruling did allow Doge affiliates to access data that had been stripped of private information, as long as those seeking access had gone through the proper training and passed background checks. Ms Hollander also ordered Doge affiliates to 'disgorge and delete' any personal information already in their possession. The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in a 9-6 vote declined on April 30 to pause ms Hollander's block on Doge's unlimited access to Social Security Administration records. Justice Department lawyers in their Supreme Court filing characterised Hollander's order as judicial overreach. 'The district court is forcing the executive branch to stop employees charged with modernising government information systems from accessing the data in those systems because, in the court's judgment, those employees do not 'need' such access,' they wrote. The six dissenting judges wrote that the case should have been treated the same as one in which 4th Circuit panel ruled 2-1 to allow Doge to access data at the US Treasury and Education Departments and the Office of Personnel Management. In a concurring opinion, seven judges who ruled against Doge wrote that the case involving Social Security data was 'substantially stronger' with 'vastly greater stakes,' citing 'detailed and profoundly sensitive Social Security records,' such as family court and school records of children, mental health treatment records and credit card information. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
