Skip to main content

Europe must not appease Trump on Greenland - Gideon Rachman - FT

Donald Trump’s threat to annex Greenland raised the once unthinkable prospect that the US could use its military to seize territory from Denmark — a Nato ally. Several European nations responded by dispatching troops to the island — ostensibly as part of an exercise to bolster Arctic security. Trump’s counter reaction was to accuse the European nations involved — which include France, Germany and the UK — of playing a “very dangerous game”. 

The US president has said that all these countries will be hit with tariffs of 10 per cent at the beginning of February, rising to 25 per cent in June. So what happens now? A wide range of outcomes is conceivable. At the more benign end, it is possible that Trump’s tariff threats will disappear into the mist. The US president has made empty tariff threats before — including a promise to impose 100 per cent levies on films made outside America and a 200 per cent tariff on champagne. Just last week, he was threatening to impose a 25 per cent tariff on any country that trades with Iran. But there has been little discernible follow up on that so far. 

Europe must not appease Trump on Greenland

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How The Economic Machine Works by Ray Dalio - Bridgewater

Source: How The Economic Machine Works by Ray Dalio

Letter: Why the geopolitics of international currency choice matters - FT

This coincidence must alert readers that a tempest is brewing on subjects noted: lurking inflation, increasing debt, suppressed interest rates and the shifting of hegemonic power.  There are only two important questions in investing that also apply to subjects impacting the future stability of the world — tell me why and tell me when.  Plender gives us the “why”, the ever-increasing “intolerable burden” of government debt and suppressed rates leveraging the global financial system. He gives us the tipping point.  What we await is “the when”, as in when do we know we have “tipped”.  Paul Hackett Madison,  NJ, US    Letter: Why the geopolitics of international currency choice matters

Reading the runes on a Warsh Fed - Martin Wolf - Financial Times

Intellectually, at least, today’s Warsh appears the same as the one of 2010. In his IMF lecture delivered in April 2025, he stressed not only the Fed’s “institutional drift”, but also its recent “failure to satisfy an essential part of its statutory remit, price stability. It has also contributed to an explosion of federal spending. And the Fed’s outsized role and underperformance have weakened the important and worthy case for monetary policy independence.” He made other criticisms, the most pointed being that “the Fed has been the most important buyer of US Treasury debt — and other liabilities backed by the US government — since 2008”. He asserts: “Fiscal dominance — where the nation’s debts constrain monetary policymakers — was long thought by economists to be a possible end-state. My view is that monetary dominance — where the central bank becomes the ultimate arbiter of fiscal policy — is the clearer and more present danger.” For Warsh, then, easy money is the road to ruin.  ...