Tag Archives: USMCA

Jan 26 2026

Canadian Ambassador Hillman Says Canada Is Relying Upon Democrats and Republicans in Congress to Protect them from Trump’s Bilateral Trade Approach with Canada


Posted originally on CTH on January 25, 2026 | Sundance 

Canadian Ambassador to the U.S., Kirsten Hillman, appears on CBS Face The Nation to discuss ongoing political and trade relations between Canada and the United States – Video and Transcript below.

During one segment of the interview, Ambassador Hillman is asked about the dissolution of the USMCA (CUSMA) trade agreement, and immediately Hillman falls back upon the same Justin Trudeau position of the government. The U.S. politicians will not allow President Trump to dissolve the USMCA.

“I think that we have to believe that our political leaders are going to be listening to the people in the constituencies for whom that instrument was drawn up, and they’re saying, this is vital to us, do no harm.”

Canada is counting on American political opposition to defend the economic interests of Canada. This is exactly the same position that former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau espoused in 2017 and 2018.

[Transcript] – So a lot is going on in the relationship between our two countries. We are so deeply integrated here on trade, you buy more from the U.S. than any other country. We have the world’s longest land border. We have shared defense interests through NATO, shared air defense with NORAD. Are we like in the middle of a divorce? Like, how do you describe the relationship?

AMB HILLMAN I- I- we’re not in the middle of a divorce, but we are in the middle of a change. There’s no question about it. I think that we are finding ourselves, quite frankly, in- in a situation where some of the foundations that have governed our relationship for a long time, that you know, integrated supply chains are good, that working together on strategic issues is- are important, that looking out for each other in important ways is- is a number one priority. I think in some quarters, Canadians feel that those foundations are being tested. We will adapt. We will make it through, I have no doubt about that, but it’s yeah, it’s a complicated time.

MARGARET BRENNAN

Well, you know, Canada had agreed to join this Board of Peace that President Trump announced out at Davos, and then overnight Thursday, the president disinvited Canada. Is this kind of public snub interfering in the relationship, and- and what does that indicate to you about what this Board of Peace is that Canada had said it did want to be a part of?

AMB HILLMAN

So we had expressed an interest in the Board of Peace a number of weeks ago, and essentially, a Board of Peace that is seeking to find peace, in particular, in Gaza and stability, is something that Canada was very much supportive of. The- the parameters of that Board of Peace had just really started to come out and- and our government was considering it, but hadn’t- hadn’t really made a decision. But I think that- that honestly, I think that the most important thing to say here, from the perspective of Canada, is that we have always and will always be promoting peace and stability and human rights around the world. We’ll do it with our allies in various fora, at NATO, at the U.N. bilaterally with like minded countries. So we’re not going to change that and- and we will give it our all in- in any fora that- that is available to us.

MARGARET BRENNAN

It- It’s kind of now described as an alternative to the United Nations. Is that something you’re comfortable with?

AMB HILLMAN

Well, we are deep supporters of the United Nations. We feel that it’s, you know, it’s not perfect, no large institution is, but having a place where the whole world can get together and express their views on issues that are important to the globe is vital. And as I say, NATO is vital, and we work with our EU counterparts and EU-Canada, you know, security discussions and in- in various other configurations. So probably all of these different fora are- are essential. The Board of Peace has yet to be fully, I think, understood, and we’ll see- we’ll- we’ll see where that goes, but the outcomes are what matter to Canada.

MARGARET BRENNAN

So your prime minister gave a national address on Thursday, and I understand he denounced authoritarianism and exclusion. He did not mention President Trump by name, but he did rebuke the claim that Trump made at Davos, that Canada lives because of the United States. You’re talking about what people receive at home, everyone has local politics, so when something like that is said, do you fear that this is starting not just a spat, but this is like a generational split between our two countries, like, how are people receiving this at home?

AMB HILLMAN

Look, I think Canadians- Canadians know that Canada lives because of Canadians, because what Canadians do for Canada, and right now, that’s where we’re trying to focus our attention. By doing what- you know, focusing our attention on what we can control as a nation for ourselves and our own economy and our own security and our own relationships around the world. The United States is always going to be a vital partner. Geography, as you said in your opener, 5,500 miles of border, deep ties, millions of Canadians and Americans that work together every day, that- that you know, do research and study and have families across the border so that- that is there, and that is something that I actually think brings strength to the relationship at times where, you know, in other- at other levels, and maybe at the political level, it- it’s more complicated.

MARGARET BRENNAN

It’s very complicated. I mean, it- it’s almost unthinkable that a phrase like authoritarianism and exclusion that that could be thought to be referring to the leader of the president of the United States?

AMB HILLMAN

Well, I think that there are concerns globally for- by our government, that we have institutions and norms, rules that have governed our countries, yours, mine, and all like minded countries for generations that are really being tested, really being tested. And- and I think what matters is how we react in the face of these tests, and for us, for our country, for our prime minister, you know, there are important implications for our country. And he’s- he’s trying to articulate a vision. And I think he is articulating a very strong vision for how we must adapt. And again, it’s- it’s about being pragmatic and principled, and that’s- that’s what we’re going to continue to be.

MARGARET BRENNAN

You have had a long career here in the United States, deeply involved with trade in particular. You helped to negotiate that free trade deal known as USMCA during the first Trump administration. President Trump was asked about it, January 13. He said, I really don’t care in terms of renewing it, there’s no real advantage. We don’t need Canada products here. Is that free trade deal doomed?

AMB HILLMAN

No, it is not doomed. That is my view. All three countries, Canada, the U.S. and Mexico did broad consultations, national consultations, with their business communities in particular, on what- how that agreement works for them. And really without exception, the American comments back were sure we’d like to maybe update this or change this a little bit, but job number one is to do no harm to this agreement, which is the economic foundation of our continental partnership and leads to very important U.S. competitiveness, and Canadian and Mexican competitiveness vis-a-vis other parts of this world. So I think there’s- I think that we have to believe that our political leaders are going to be listening to the people in the constituencies for whom that instrument was drawn up, and they’re saying, this is vital to us, do no harm.

MARGARET BRENNAN

So do you think there’s a bilateral trade deal here? Is that what the Trump administration is going for, rather than the three way deal or–

AMB HILLMAN

I- you know, I think- I- I- we hear- we hear that sometimes, we hear different things. It is important to remember that even within that agreement, there are a lot of bilateral elements, but there is- there are advantages to doing things trilaterally. There’s a lot of supply chain movement that happens between our three countries. And if you, if you break it into two, you could have different rules and disconnects there that are inefficient for business. So we’re driven- look, Canada will be driven by what the best thing to do is, as I say, for the companies and constituencies that are relying on that agreement to create jobs.

MARGARET BRENNAN

Because you heard the commerce secretary say at Davos, you know, globalism isn’t working. I mean, these free trade deals are part of that globalism. And it was just a week ago, your prime minister was in Beijing, and he described Canada’s relationship with China as more predictable than its relationship with the United States. He really meant more predictable than the Trump administration’s United States.

AMB HILLMAN

Look, there’s no question that the last number of months have been unpredictable for us in our relationship with the United States. You know, we have a trade agreement that had us virtually tariff free between our two countries, and now we have very serious tariffs on steel, aluminum, autos, lumber, and that’s causing a lot of challenges within our country. There are people that are losing their jobs. There are industries that are being reoriented, and it’s very difficult. So that is seen as, yes, unpredictable.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But fortress North America had been an idea. I mean, the treasury secretary talked about it, that the United States, Mexico, Canada, we could stand up together, you know, have shared values, and stand up to China. That seems dead, if Canada is really describing a new alliance here with Beijing.

AMB HILLMAN: Well, I think- I think we have to put this in perspective. The- the agreement that we did with China a few weeks ago was a very focused and surgical agreement that was largely, or almost exclusively, designed to de-escalate some tariff escalation that had happened over the past year and a bit. So over the past year and a bit, China had put very punitive tariffs on Canadian agricultural products and fish and seafood, shutting Canadians out from one of their primary markets, if not for some of them, their primary market. And so we went to Beijing to re-establish market access for our farmers and our fishers. It’s exactly what the U.S. administration did in October when they re-established market access for U.S. soy farmers, and in exchange, rolled back some tariffs and fees. So this is a very pragmatic, very focused approach. I think it’s important to put it in context.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But even Ontario’s premier said this is letting Chinese “spy cars” into your country. I think he means electric vehicles that will be cheaply made in China. Are you worried about becoming too beholden to China and its cheap manufacturing?

AMB HILLMAN: No, we’re not, because, we- the- the auto side of this agreement was again to take us back to 2023, we had the importation of vehicles made in China. Many of those were Teslas, as a matter of fact, and we’ve gone back and stuck to the level of 2023 for those imports. So this isn’t a revolutionary new thing. This is really just trying to roll back or de-escalate what had been escalated over the past year and a bit.

MARGARET BRENNAN

Well, the treasury secretary is saying that Albertans are going to have a referendum on succeeding from Canada. He seems to be urging that. What do you make of this–

AMB HILLMAN: Well–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –and comments like that?

AMB HILLMAN: I think it’s important to let Albertans and Canadians manage their own very delicate domestic, you know, politics themselves. I think that that’s probably wise counsel. Having grown up in Alberta, you know, it’s a- it’s a- it’s a province that has lots of strong views about the way in which it interacts with the rest of the country, as do other parts of our nation. And those are important debates to be had, but they’re debates for our country to have within its own citizenry.

MARGARET BRENNAN: It seems to be stirring the pot there a bit, but I want to ask you what your prime minister said at Davos. He got a standing ovation for this speech. He described a ruptured global order, the end of a nice story, and the beginning of a new brutal reality, which he described as a predatory one. Take a listen.

MARK CARNEY, PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA: Stop invoking rules-based international order as though it still functions as advertised. Call it what it is: a system of intensifying great power rivalry, where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as coercion.

[SOUNDS ON TAPE ENDS]

MARGARET BRENNAN: He said, if you’re not at the table, then you’re on the menu. What does this new world order look like?

AMB HILLMAN

Well, that’s a good question. I mean, I think he laid out in his- his discussion, his speech, his- his view of what is happening in our world. And it’s- it’s a world in which rules that governed every player in the globe, every country were maybe not perfectly abided by, as he said, maybe not always exactly exercised as one would hope, but still were sufficient to form the basis of the prosperity, the stability, the predictability that we all used to maximize peace and stability and- and maximize economic reality. So we’re moving away our economic benefits, and we’re moving away from that, and we have to- countries like ours, have to figure out what that means for us. I think that what it does mean for us is that we can’t walk away from our principles. We can’t walk away from our belief in rules that are to be abided by by everyone if they commit to them. But at the same time, we have to be pragmatic and we have to look inward to control what we can within our own economies to be as resilient as we possibly can within our own economies, and part of that means engaging pragmatically with a broad array of countries around the world, in trade agreements, in investment relationships and in partnerships.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Sounds like Canada is picking off our friends.

AMB HILLMAN: You know, I- no, I think Canada is trying to make sure that it is the most resilient it can be for our own benefit.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m being told that President Trump posted on social media just a few moments ago that Canada is against the Golden Dome over Greenland and has voted against it to choose to be closer to China. That’s how it was described to me. Yet President Trump had previously talked about Canada participating in this Golden Dome project, which isn’t yet built, but it’s supposed to be missile- layered missile defense, as I understand it. Do you know what he’s talking about, that Canada has rejected being involved?

AMB HILLMAN: No, I’m afraid I don’t, but what I can say about the Golden Dome is this, Canada is- is investing over $80 billion over the next five years in our defens-, in our defense systems, and a big part of that is Arctic defense. And a big part of our Arctic defense investments are something called over-the-horizon radar, which is a system that allows us to see the threats that are coming into the Arctic before they arrive. So that is part- and when we have talked to the president about protecting our hemisphere, we have talked about ways in which our different capabilities can work together so that we have eyes on the region and we cooperate in a way that protects both of our countries.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So the president has described that as Canada wanting to plug in to the system. As you understand it, that’s the better description, your own system that would coordinate?

AMB HILLMAN: Right. Much as we do across all sorts of defense systems, where we’re interoperable. We- we work together. We make our investments that make sense for Canada and defending our territory and defending our sovereignty, but we work with the Americans and- and other allies to maximize the benefits of those.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So in- in short, you do think there needs to be more focus on Arctic defense, but you’re on board to help do that?

AMB HILLMAN: We’re deeply committed to Arctic defense. Absolutely.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I need to ask you about NATO, because you’re also a partner at NATO. The only time that NATO’s Article 5 was ever invoked, and you know this, was after the 9/11 attacks on this country. That collective defense clause, an attack on one is an attack on all, meant that Europe and Canada, they sent troops right alongside American troops on the battlefield in Afghanistan. Here’s what President Trump said.

[SOUND ON TAPE BEGINS]

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. You know, they’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan, or this or that. And they did. They stayed a little back, little off the front lines.

[SOUNDS ON TAPE ENDS]

MARGARET BRENNAN

He was speaking about all NATO troops. But we did check and about 40,000 Canadians deployed to Afghanistan between 2001 and 2014. 158 were killed, 635 wounded in action. What is a remark like that do to people at home?

AMB HILLMAN: You know, I think what’s most important is that we know what our Canadians have done, and I know that your American armed forces are deeply respectful and deeply appreciative of having stood side by side with Canadians in those very, very treacherous and difficult fights. We know that to be true. They know that to be true, and that’s what matters.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Ambassador, thank you for your time as it wraps up here in Washington.

AMB HILLMAN: Thank you for having me.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Great to have you. We’ll be back in a moment.

[END TRANSCRIPT]

Jan 25 2026

President Trump Threatens to Hit Canada with 100% Tariff if they Become a Transshipping Hub for Chinese Imports


Posted originally on CTH on January 24, 2026 | Sundance 

Canada signing a trade agreement with China to permit the import of EVs is another escalation in the exploitation of the USMCA compact.

For the position of China, using Canada as a route to ship component goods into the United States is just a slight expansion of their current technique to avoid U.S. tariffs.  However, President Trump is taking action immediately.

Noting on his Truth Social platform, President Trump announced that if Canada does effectively go through with allowing the import of Chinese electric vehicles, then the U.S. will impose a 100% countervailing duty against all Canadian imports.

[SOURCE]

“[…] As a part of the deal, Canada will ease the tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles that it imposed in tandem with the U.S. in 2024. In exchange, China will lower retaliatory tariffs on key Canadian agricultural products.” ~Politico

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney continues giving President Trump the ammunition to dissolve the USMCA trade agreement this year.

USTR Jamieson Greer and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick have both expressed anticipation of a new bilateral trade agreement to stop all this Canadian nonsense.

Jan 24 2026

Secretary Lutnick Gently Dispatches the Feelings of Canada and the EU, and Focuses on Pragmatic Economic Growth


Posted originally on CTH on January 23, 2026 | Sundance

Hilarious Bloomberg interview with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.  The topics are European trade and politics combined with the overlay of Canadian trade and politics.  The Bloomberg panelists question Lutnick about the similar “feelings” of the Europeans and Canadians, as it pertains to the outcome of trade discussions.  It’s the feelings that make things difficult to negotiate.

Secretary Lutnick doesn’t dismiss the narrative but deconstructs the substance of the topic brilliantly.  Lutnick notes the ridiculous nature of the Canadian trade position and their decision to go running to China because their feelings are hurt.  Lutnick then affirms the USMCA is going to be dissolved mid-summer and fall of this year.

As we noted at the end of last year, splitting the USMCA into two bilateral trade deals, one for Mexico and one for Canada, will be one of the most interesting and long-term economically significant moves in U.S. trade history.  It is going to be a lot of fun to watch these negotiations, and the pre-positioning gives us a preview of what is to come.

Mexico is doing everything almost perfectly in preparation for their bilateral deal.  Canada is doing exactly the opposite and positioning themselves for the worst possible outcome of a deal with the USA.  The disparity in approaches is so different, even now it is remarkable to watch. PROMPTED:

(VIA BLOOMBERG) – […] Canada has “the second-best deal in the world” with its access to the US market, Lutnick said, behind only Mexico. The Commerce chief also indicated that Canada’s tilt toward China could become an issue in talks over revamping the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement known as USMCA.

If Ottawa opts to import Chinese electric vehicles and other trade-strengthening steps with Beijing, “do you think the president of the United States is going to say you should keep having the second-best deal in the world” during USMCA talks, Lutnick questioned.

[…] Canada’s Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne told reporters in Quebec City that every Group of Seven nation is charting its own strategic path forward with China, and Canada is no different. 

“We’ll continue to work hand in hand with our US partner,” he said. “At the same time, I think Canadians have understood by now that diversification is key. We need to be more resilient.” 

Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum said separately Thursday that her nation will work to maintain the USMCA trade deal despite recent disputes between Carney and US President Donald Trump. Speaking at her daily press briefing, she also said she would try to talk with Carney.

Next week, Mexico’s Economy Minister Marcelo Ebrard will travel to Washington for trade talks, Sheinbaum also said, speaking in Puebla, Mexico. (read full article)

Having travelled to regions of the world in discussions with people who factually determine economic outcomes, it is clear that every single policy shift undertaken by the Canadian government of Mark Carney is exactly the opposite of what is needed.  In the next 24 months, the lifestyle of every Canadian will forever change.

President Trump is reestablishing an entirely new economic, trade and finance system. The era of the Marshal Plan is over; it has been factually deconstructed in the past 12 months.

Canadians and Europeans are desperately trying to offset the ramifications, hold on to their economic benefits and find a new mechanism to afford the domestic indulgences now eliminated by President Trump and the absence of money.

The EU and Canada have chased ‘climate change’ and ‘green energy’ schemes into a dead end of economic crisis. German Chancellor Merz has admitted the problem to the world.  The direct and collateral damage is generational, and only just now beginning to surface.

When combined with their intransigent resistance to adapt to President Trump’s global economic and trade reset, core issue “reciprocity”, this reality takes both economies down a path that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Choosing to embrace China in lieu of modifying bilateral trade agreements with the USA is a short-sighted fool’s errand. Unfortunately, with political calculations each entity, Canada and/or the EU collective, are pandering to their “feeling” base out of an unwillingness to change trade behavior as demanded by Trump.

From Ottawa to London, to Paris, Berlin and Brussels the geopolitical landscape is changing permanently as President Donald Trump resets their global trade relationship to the United States.

President Trump is leveraging the largest consumer market in the world to the benefit of the customer; that’s America.  Trump’s direct and specific intent is transactional, to rebuild an industrial and self-sufficient nation that is the envy of the world.

For several generations, Canada and the EU have exploited their biggest customer and taken the U.S. for granted. Both the EU and Canadian economies are stalled and soon to be shrinking.  The USA economy will easily grow above 5% GDP and Mexico is likely to be the biggest beneficiary of their proactive positioning.

It’s not about ‘feelings’ it is just the cold reality of the economics.

Sep 29 2025

Ep. 3740a – More Tariffs On Countries Means More Manufactures Returning To US, Fire Powell


Posted originally on Rumble By X 22 Report on: September 28, 2025

Jul 15 2025

Over $4B Pledged to Ukraine Reconstruction


Posted originally on Jul 15, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |

Ukraine on Fire

The Ukraine Recovery Conference 2025 (URC) on July 10-11 in Rome concluded with joint agreements to provide Ukraine with 3.55 billion euros for reconstruction. “We received a clear message from Ukraine’s friends and partners: they are ready to invest in our recovery,” Oleksii Kuleba, Deputy Prime Minister for the Restoration of Ukraine and Minister for the Development of Communities and Territories stated. There is false hope that Ukraine will exist after this prolonged conflict.

The Ministry approved of five agreements worth over 370 million euros during this conference. The Italian Foreign Ministry agreed to offer 100% insurance coverage for banks on export loans up to 1.5 billion euros. If a bank lends money to support exports to Ukraine but the borrower fails to repay, the government-backed institution will take the loss. The claim is that the guarantee will safeguard Italian companies so that they may continue exporting goods and services to Ukraine. Ukrainian buyers will also have access to credit, and with the 100% insurance guarantee, banks may lower credit standards to otherwise risky borrowers. The potential for fraud is enormous. Worse, the Italian government and therefore the Italian people will be on the hook for 1.5 billion euros amid a highly unstable environment where repayment is not guaranteed.

The European Union and development banks also signed 10 agreements worth 929.3 million euros at the Rome conference. The World Bank through in $200 million as well for good measure. “Rebuilding Ukraine is not just about our country. It’s also about your countries, your companies, your technology, your jobs,” Zelensky said. Quite contrary as these government programs are selling out domestic policy in favor of a foreign government. The people do not benefit in any meaningful way as Europe has never relied on Ukraine for trade. Europe was more beholden to Russia before this ongoing war, which is precisely why they are experiencing a worsening energy crisis.

We need a Marshall Plan-style approach, and we should develop it together,” Zelensky stated, referring to the $13 billion (over $150 billion today) deal that the US granted to 16 European nations after World War II. The scale cannot be compared. The United States needed to stabilize Europe after the war to ensure that capital could continue to flow back to the States. No one is relying on Ukrainian capital. The US was also attempting to quell the spread of communism during this time and had a plethora of motives for assistance, none of which were purely charitable.

Western leaders are sacrificing countless funds for a nation that was never a strategic partner prior to the war. They believe the true jewel will be conquering Russia, whereas Ukraine is merely their stepping stone to enter the resource-rich, unconquerable land. Countless issues could be avoided if decision makers used history as their guide.

Jul 2 2025

Pentagon Stops Some Promised Munitions for Ukraine


Posted originally on CTH on July 1, 2025 | Sundance 

If my data alignment points are accurate, now that the BBB is passed through the Senate we are likely to see some very major geopolitical changes come rushing to the surface.

Keep watching and let’s see if things happen the way we expect.

WASHINGTON DC – The Pentagon has halted shipments of some air defense missiles and other precision munitions to Ukraine due to worries that U.S. weapons stockpiles have fallen too low.

[…] In a statement following the publication of this story, White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly said that the decision “was made to put America’s interests first following a DOD review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe. The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned — just ask Iran.”

Included among the items being pulled back are missiles for Patriot air defense systems, precision artillery rounds, Hellfire and other missiles that Ukraine launches from its F-16 fighters and drones.

The losses will surely be felt on the ground as Ukraine continues to beat back fresh assaults by Russian forces. (read more)

In related news not getting attention, French President Emmanuel Macron had a two-hour phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin today. [LINK]  Also, Volodymyr Zelenskyy called the president of Azerbaijan today, an ally of Putin [LINK]. Azerbaijan is to Russia as Mexico is to the United States.

July 1, 2025 | Sundance

Jun 25 2025

NATO Pledges $40 Billion to Ukraine


Posted originally on Jun 25, 2025 by Martin Armstrong 

Rutte Mark with Zelensky

The neocons would never permit a true ceasefire. The war in the Middle East must continue in order to broaden the West’s conflict with Russia. Russia is not permitted to remain neutral, despite Putin’s insistence. Follow the money—NATO has assembled $40 BILLION to prolong aggression against Russia.

“Let’s not forget, Iran is heavily involved in the fight of Russia against Ukraine by, for example, their drone deliveries, which are killing innocent Ukrainians every day, in cities, in communities, without any respect for life,” Rutte said. Russia has paid Iran for defense and drones throughout the conflict in Ukraine, and therefore, the neocons believe Russia should be held responsible for the war in the Middle East.

Russia has successfully fended off NATO and the weaponization of Ukraine by the West. The messaging put forth by NATO aligns with Socrates’ predictions—the worst is yet to come and we have mass panic cycles occurring in nearly every major economy in 2026. The reason cannot be provided by the computer, but historically, we only see such an uptick in activity during times of global conflict.

NATO North Atlantic Terror Organization

“You will see important language about Ukraine, including connecting the defense spending up to 2035 to Ukraine, and the need for Ukraine to stay in the fight,” Rutte said. “This is a clear commitment by allies.” They likely expected Russia to fold earlier, but they will not give up their battle. Rutte specifically mentioned that Europe and Canada, and not the United States, are aligned in their unwavering financial support for Ukraine. “And we have – I can announce that now – new estimates showing that our European and Canadian Allies have stepped up and have already pledged – where we originally would have been able to announce €20 billion over the first three months of this year, it is now they will provide over €35 billion ($40.6 billion) in additional security assistance to Ukraine for the year ahead.”

Rutte said that Ukraine’s path to NATO is “irreversible.”

The next player up to bat is China. The neocons WILL find a method to break Beijing’s neutrality. It matters not that everyone is a trade partner; the specific trade deals that displease the neocons will be highlighted as a reason for war.

“The most significant and direct threat facing this Alliance remains Russia. Moscow continues to wage war against Ukraine with the support of North Korea, Iran, and China as well as Belarus.” NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

China will partner with Russia when they are forced out of neutrality. The West has never desired diplomatic relations with China as it has always been an enemy nation. China’s growing global influence is a direct threat to the West’s power and those moving the chess pieces genuinely believe that NATO can decimate Russia, China, and Ukraine. Our computer does not agree with them.

Jun 25 2025

Spain Requests NATO Spending Leniency


Posted originally on Jun 25, 2025 by Martin Armstrong 

NATO vs. Russia

Spain will be unable to meet NATO’s new 5% of GDP membership requirement. In the latest round of a nation rebuking a globalist entity that dampens its sovereignty, Spain has broken step with the European Union and NATO by admitting that Russia poses no immediate threat.

“Spain will continue to fulfil its duty in the years and decades ahead and will continue to actively contribute to the European security architecture. However, Spain cannot commit to a specific spending target in terms of GDP at this summit,” Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez told NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

NATO is set to meet for the first time since Donald Trump’s re-election and Rutte is insistent that member nations up their contributions to appease the bloc’s largest contributor. Trump has repeatedly warned that the US would reduce or pull funding from NATO if other nations failed to meet their 2% of GDP requirement. Trump declared that Russia posed no immediate threat to the US and accused Europe of over-relying on America for protection.

Rutte would now like to raise that 2% target to 5%, which is a significant increase. The new budget proposal will allot 3.5% of spending on military expenditure,s and 1.5% will be spent on defense-related items like cybersecurity and military mobility.

Spain contributes the least to NATO in terms of GDP compared to other members, spending an estimated 1.28% of its GDP. Spain is the fourth-largest economy in the Eurozone, and other members do not believe it should get a free pass. Spain’s economy grew by 3% last year, far surpassing the Eurozone average of 0.08%. Yet, the government sees no value in spending on NATO when the war is isolated to Ukraine.

2023_07_08_11_17_17_Spain_says_cluster_bombs_should_not_be_sent_to_Ukraine_Reuters

“Our threat is not Russia bringing its troops across the Pyrenees,” Sanchez said, referring to the mountain range dividing France and Spain. “When we talk about Russia it’s more a hybrid threat. It’s the threat of cyber attacks. So what we have to do is not just talk about defense, but fundamentally talk about security.” He admitted that he does not believe Putin has plans to conquer Europe, breaking from the ongoing EU neocon narrative.

Previously, nations would need to unanimously vote on new spending policies. “Of course, it is not our intention to limit the spending ambitions of other allies or to obstruct the outcome of the upcoming summit,” the Sánchez letter reads. It no longer matters what one member nation believes, as unanimity is no longer required among any centralized power, be it the European Union or NATO. All members must adhere to the plans of the unelected bureaucrats, and those plans clearly detail an escalation in warfare.

Jun 22 2025

Volodymyr Zelensky Demands $40 Billion in Annual Budget Support for Ukraine


Posted originally on CTH on June 21, 2025 | Sundance 

This is madness.  Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sends a twitter message as if he’s ordering coffee from the guy down the street, telling NATO members not to forget to send him his $40 billion in “budgetary support.”

[SOURCE]

Budgetary support means we pay for the operational cost of Ukraine government, including govt payrolls, pensions, healthcare services, welfare and social services for the people in Ukraine.

The crazy thing is, unless Trump stops it, our congress will give it to him.  And even if Trump tries to stop it, congress will demand the payment as part of their appropriations process.

Maybe it’s just me, but the in-your-face hubris of it is, well, just off-the-charts.  As if we don’t have important priorities here at home that could better use these taxpayer funds.

Suspicious Cat, has, well, frustrate!

Jun 12 2025

US to Take Ukraine off Payroll


Posted originally on Jun 12, 2025 by Martin Armstrong 

While domestic small businesses suffered under Biden-Harris, Ukraine saw a boost in their small business thanks to billions in grants that were paid for by the US taxpayer. USAID subsidized Ukrainian businesses through co-investment programs, interest rate compensation on loans, cashback incentives for leading equipment, and direct financial support. All in all, USAID’s “Investment for Business Resilience Activity” provided $100 million in investments.

The Bureau of Labor and Statistics was altering data on domestic jobs while other branches of the government were focused on maintaining Ukraine’s workforce. The aforementioned USAID program supported over 1,050 businesses and allegedly saved nearly 18,000 jobs.

USAID was working directly with Ukrainian banks to help lower borrowing costs to small and medium enterprises. Trump immediately halted this program in January 2025. The average person simply does not understand how much money the Biden Administration was sending to Ukraine.

Biden and Zelensky

US taxpayers supported the entire Ukrainian government. Over $30 billion was sent to Ukraine in a two-year period to pay for “essential government operations.” Americans were forced to pay for public servants’ salaries, pensions, healthcare, and more. None of this includes the tens of billions spent on military-related items or humanitarian aid.

Americans did not vote to use their public funds in this manner. The domestic economy was suffering from record inflation post-COVID. Domestic entrepreneurs could not secure business loans. There is a clear pattern of one political party prioritizing foreign entities over its own citizens.

Now, the Trump Administration announced that it needs to make additional cuts to Ukrainian assistance. “This administration takes a very different view of that conflict. We believe that a negotiated peaceful settlement is in the best interest of both parties and our nation’s interests, especially with all the competing interests around the globe,” US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth explained. The complete 2026 budget has not yet been released by the Pentagon, but Hegseth said it “provides a historic level of funding for military readiness, putting (U.S.) warfighters and their needs first.”

Using American funds to prioritize America—what a novel concept. This is why Trump and Vance had a shouting match with Zelensky during his failed Oval Office visit. Zelensky feels entitled to US funding after years of using US public funds as his personal ATM under Biden.

The European Union now funds around 84% of Ukraine’s operations. It is expected that the bloc will spend around $40 billion on external financing needs in 2025. The Ukraine Facility instrument provides €50 billion in “flexible support” for Ukraine over a three-year period. They’re using frozen Russian assets to fund this account since the EU simply does not have the money to prop up a foreign government.

This has been an extremely expensive war and it is nowhere near over. I should add that US assistance was all provided outside the regular defense budget. This occurred during peacetime in a war that in no way involved the United States. This is what happens when a foreign nation blackmails the president of the world’s leading superpower.

Biden’s crime family received over $20 million from Ukraine in “influence peddling” schemes. Hunter Biden secured $11 million for his personal company through Burisma. FBI informant, Alexander Smirnov, said under oath that Burisma selected Hunter to “protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.” The text messages stored on Hunter’s laptop revealed that he openly threatened people using his father’s name while his father was the vice president. Joe Biden accepted bribes and altered US policy to support his son and line his pockets. The CCP also had the Biden family in their pocket.

Decreasing, if not ceasing, funding for Ukraine is long overdue. Imagine if those funds were invested in the domestic economy rather than laundered through under-the-table deals. Americans are not responsible for subsidizing Ukraine.