Britain, Economic, European Union, Government, Politics, United States

Britain dismayed at US trade war

US TRADE TARIFFS

THE Prime Minister Theresa May has attacked Donald Trump’s “unjustified” trade tariffs amid fears that Britain’s automotive industry could be hit next.

Mrs May said she was “deeply disappointed” with the US President’s decision to impose higher import taxes on steel and aluminium from Britain and the EU.

The EU has signalled that it is prepared to hit back, making a complaint to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and finalising a list of American products it will target with tariffs of its own.

There are fears, however, that this could spark a spiralling trade war, with Mr Trump responding to any retaliation by imposing additional import levies on cars from the UK and EU.

That possibility will concern the more than 169,000 employees in the UK motor vehicle industry, on top of existing fears for Britain’s 31,000 steel workers.

International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox suggested that the UK may not fully support the EU’s retaliatory measures, instead saying Britain only backs the complaint to the WTO.

He said it would “take some time” for EU member states to agree their collective response, and urged the bloc to pursue compromise with the White House in the interim – even though British diplomats have previously offered their support to measures drawn up in Brussels.

Dr Fox said it would be “very, very unfortunate if we get into this tit-for-tat position, especially with one of our closest allies.”

He added: “Nobody wins in a trade war, there are only casualties. We very much regret that these tariffs were put in place.

“We think it’s of dubious legality and we will be with the EU 100 per cent in taking this to a dispute at the WTO.”

The deepening row comes just before a G7 meeting of world leaders in Quebec this week, where European leaders will air their grievances to the US President. French president Emmanuel Macron has already told Mr Trump his new tariffs on EU goods was a “mistake” and “illegal”.

Mrs May’s language was more measured, but she said: “I am deeply disappointed at the unjustified decision by the United States to apply tariffs to EU steel and aluminium imports.

“The US, EU and UK are close allies and have always promoted values of open and fair trade across the world. Our steel and aluminium industries are highly important to the UK, but they also contribute to US industry, including defence projects which bolster US national security.

“The EU and UK should be permanently exempted from tariffs and we will continue to work together to protect and safeguard our workers and industries.”

Although it is said that the Prime Minister has additional concerns over US trade tariffs, it is believed she has not expressed these in public as she hopes to tie up a comprehensive post-Brexit trade deal with the White House and does not want to inflame the situation.

The EU, which handles trade matters on behalf of the UK, has been finalising its response to the US, with measures affecting thousands of US imports to the EU worth £2.5billion, including Levi’s jeans and Jack Daniel’s bourbon, hit with tariffs of up to 25 per cent.

Cecilia Malmstrom, the EU’s trade chief, admitted the bloc was “anxious” that Mr Trump would follow through on earlier threats to impose tariffs on European cars.

She said: “This would create enormous damage, not only to the European economy but also to the US.” The US levies of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium imports follow promises made by Mr Trump under his America First programme.

Earlier this year, he said: “If the EU wants to increase their already massive tariffs and barriers on US companies doing business there, we will apply a tax on their cars, which freely pour into the US.”

EU cars sold in the US face a levy of 2.5 per cent, compared to a 10 per cent tax on US vehicles brought into Europe.

How the US raised the stakes:

. Donald Trump announced in March that the EU and countries including Mexico, Canada and Brazil would be hit by increased steel and aluminium tariffs to protect US firms against imports from China, which has flooded the market with cut-price steel.

. The EU, which negotiates trade on behalf of Britain, was granted a temporary exemption while Theresa May and other leaders lobbied for a permanent reprieve.

. The UK is concerned about the effect of the measures on its resurgent £1.6billion steel industry, which employs some 31,000.

. Britain exported 350,000 tonnes of steel worth £376million to the US last year – 7 per cent of its output.

. If the EU hits back, as it has threatened to do, Britain fears that Mr Trump will retaliate by raising tariffs on cars, in a blow to the UK car industry, which employs around 169,000.

Standard
Economic, European Union, Government, Italy, Politics, Society

A provocation and insult to democracy

ITALY

ITALY has had no fewer than 65 governments since the War – with an average survival rate of just over a year. The country is hardly renowned as a beacon of democratic stability.

Even by the standards of this volatile nation, however, the current political crisis is becoming more troubling and bizarre by the day. It proves yet again the disastrous folly of imposing the one-size-fits-all euro on countries for which it is so obviously unsuitable. Pertinently, it demonstrates that Brussels has no qualms about trampling on democracy to keep the dream of a European superstate alive.

Italy’s national finances are in a dire state. Marooned in a sea of debt, with a stagnant economy and crippling unemployment rate, citizens of that beleaguered land renounced their mainstream Europhile parties in a general election just three months ago. They rightly blamed membership of the single currency for their misery and elected a coalition of unashamedly populist, Eurosceptic parties – led by the maverick Five Star movement and Right-wing Northern League.

Yet, when radical economist Paolo Savona – a passionate opponent of the euro – was named finance minister he was vetoed by Italy’s slavishly pro-Brussels president Sergio Matarella, who then nominated his own man as prime minister and invited him to form a totally unelected government. It has no mandate of course and will soon fall. Mr Matarella could possibly be impeached for overreaching his powers. But what an affront to democracy.

Had this happened in some Third World state, it would have quickly been denounced as tyrannical and corrupt. Not in Europe. In both Paris and Berlin, Mr Matarella is being praised for his courage. There is no better example or illustration of how people across the European continent are being disenfranchised – and just why they are crying out for change.

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, National Security, Politics, Society

The Galileo satellite project

BREXIT

Galileo is Europe’s Global Satellite Navigation System (GNSS), providing improved positioning and timing information with significant positive implications for many European services and users.

BREXIT talks have turned into an extraordinary row over security cooperation as Brussels accused British negotiators of “chasing a fantasy”.

A senior EU official even threatened to bring talks to a halt due to acrimony over the EU’s Galileo satellite project and a post-Brexit security pact.

Brussels says Britain should not have full access to the £9billion satellite navigation system after it leaves the EU.

Britain has hit back by threatening it could demand the return of £1.2billion of taxpayer investment if Brussels goes through with its threat.

The UK also warned that the bloc’s hard-line approach to future cooperation on crime and security issues was in danger of creating “unnecessary risks to public safety”.

A senior EU official then struck back by warning of a halt to Brexit talks, insisting Brussels “would not negotiate under threat”.

The official claimed that British negotiators were “chasing a fantasy” and ignoring the “consequences of Brexit”.

The comments are likely to have infuriated the Government and Brexiteers, with talks now at a critical juncture ahead of a key summit at the end of next month.

The EU’s approach to Galileo has particularly enraged ministers, because Britain has already invested hundreds of millions in the programme.

Jean-Claude Juncker’s close ally Martin Selmayr is thought to be behind the tough approach, which has caused a split with other EU states that want security cooperation with the UK. Britain wants access to high-security elements of the Galileo programme, started in 2003 to rival America’s dominant GPS system, that have been factored into British military planning.

But Brussels claims that as a non-EU country, the UK should be treated similarly to partners such as America.

Britain warned the bloc that failure to provide the UK access to encrypted parts of Galileo would create an “irreparable security risk” and could cost the EU a total of £2billion.

Brexit negotiators said the EU would face a £880million bill if the UK continues to be frozen out of the programme – as well as a three-year delay beyond its expected completion in 2020.

In a position paper, the UK also said it would seek to claim back its £1.2billion taxpayer investment if Brussels refused to offer immediate unrestricted access. And the Government reiterated that it would push ahead with the development of its own alternative.

The UK’s demands were outlined in a combative paper presented to the EU negotiating team. The UK text said: “An end to close UK participation will be to the detriment of Europe’s prosperity and security and could result in delays and additional costs to the programme.”

The paper suggested that Brussels was deliberately overlooking the UK’s “considerable contribution” to European security.

It added: “The Commission suggestion that UK involvement in such exchanges and discussions ‘could irretrievably compromise the integrity’ of the system risks being interpreted as a lack of trust in the UK.” Brexit Secretary David Davis added: “A relationship based solely on existing third country precedents, as some seem to be suggesting, would lead to a substantial and avoidable reduction in our shared security capability.”

EU officials suggested that handing the UK security codes to the system would give them the ability to turn it off single-handedly while outside the EU.

An official also claimed that UK calls for reimbursement of its investments could breach a so-called “backsliding” clause that could allow talks to be frozen.

 

ARE the bureaucrats running the European Commission determined to damage the continent’s security in the pursuit of their grand project? There is no other way to explain the decision to try and exclude Britain from the Galileo satellite project after Brexit.

If this is an attempt to use Galileo to teach Britain a lesson it’s a mistake. This country’s vast military spending and world leading intelligence services mean the cards are overwhelmingly stacked in our favour. Far too often Britain’s negotiators have underplayed their hand. But rightly they have now issued an ultimatum: access to Galileo or our £1billion investment back, with the threat that Britain could go it alone – or join forces with Australia.

Meanwhile, the European Commission ought to consider much graver threats to the grand projects – Italy, crippled by debt and run by a ragtag coalition united only by loathing for Brussels, and the continuing rise of Eurosceptic opinion across more than half the continent.

Standard