French President Recommends EU Use Anti-Coercion Trade Bazooka Against Trump – MishTalk

And Canada stands fully behind NATO articles 5 and 2, in defense of Greenland.

Europe Weighs Going All-Out

The New York Times reports After Trump Reignites a Trade War Over Greenland, Europe Weighs Going All-Out

In a single post on Saturday night, President Trump upended months of progress on trade negotiations with an ultimatum that puts Europe on a crash course with the United States — long its closest ally and suddenly one of its biggest threats.

In the Truth Social post, Mr. Trump demanded a deal to buy Greenland, saying that otherwise he would slap tariffs on a group of European nations, first 10 percent in February, then 25 percent in June.

It appeared to leave little room for Europe to maneuver or negotiate in a harsh and combative era of geopolitics. It also left Europe with few options to counter Mr. Trump without repercussions.

European leaders are loath to accept the forced takeover of an autonomous territory that is controlled by Denmark, a member of both NATO and the European Union.

Officials and outside analysts increasingly argue that Europe will need to respond to Mr. Trump with force — namely by hitting back on trade. But doing so could come at a heavy cost to both the bloc’s economy and its security, since Europe remains heavily reliant on the United States for support through NATO and in Russia’s war with Ukraine.

“We either fight a trade war, or we’re in a real war,” said Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a research institute in Brussels.

Within hours of the post, members of the European Parliament announced that they would freeze the ratification of the trade deal that Mr. Trump and Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, struck last summer. And members of European Parliament are openly calling for trade retaliation. Ambassadors from across the 27-nation bloc gathered in Brussels on Sunday for an emergency meeting, diplomats said.

Europe has a trade weapon specifically created to defend against political coercion quickly and forcefully, and as Mr. Trump’s threats sank in, policymakers argued that this is the time to wield it.

The tool — officially called the “anti-coercion instrument,” unofficially called Europe’s trade “bazooka” — could be used to slap limitations on big American technology companies or other service providers that do large amounts of business on the continent. But using it would sharply ratchet up trans-Atlantic tensions.

Mr. Macron will request, on behalf of France, the activation of the anti-coercion trade tool, a senior French official said on Sunday.

Even Keir Starmer, the prime minister of Britain — which, like Norway, is not in the European Union, but was listed among the countries that will be slapped with tariffs — called Mr. Trump’s tariff move “completely wrong.” Mr. Starmer has carefully cultivated a positive relationship with the White House.

Macron to Seek Use of EU Anti-Coercion Tool

Bloomberg reports Macron to Seek Use of EU Anti-Coercion Tool as Calls to Retaliate Grow

French President Emmanuel Macron will request the activation of the European Union’s anti-coercion instrument amid increasing calls for the region to retaliate against US President Donald Trump’s new tariffs on European countries over Greenland.

Macron, who on Saturday branded the threat of tariffs “unacceptable,” was in contact with European counterparts and would make the request to use the ACI — the bloc’s most powerful retaliatory tool — on behalf of France, according to a person close to the president who requested anonymity to comply with government rules.

EU national ambassadors will meet Sunday to discuss the bloc’s next steps, another person familiar with the matter said earlier.

Germany’s SPD parliamentary group — part of Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s ruling coalition — called for the European Commission to act quickly and come up with “concrete countermeasures” against the US. The German government is considering all responses to Trump’s tariff threat, but so far hasn’t decided on any specific measures, according to a person familiar with the plans.

Manfred Weber, president of the European People’s Party, the largest political group in the European Parliament, said on Saturday that approval of the EU’s trade deal with the US is no longer possible.

Finland’s Prime Minister Petteri Orpo warned that the European Union “has the means to respond” though he said he didn’t want to “see that happen.” Speaking to YLE radio, he said he has requested an extraordinary meeting of the European Council to coordinate and develop a common strategy among European countries and Denmark.

While the EU’s anti-coercion instrument has never been used, it was designed primarily as a deterrent, and if needed, to respond to deliberate coercive actions from third countries that use trade measures as a means to pressure the policy choices of the EU or its members.

Those measures could include tariffs, new taxes on tech companies or targeted curbs on investments in the EU. They could also involve limiting access to certain parts of the EU market or restricting firms from bidding for public contracts in Europe.

Weapon of Last Resort

Bloomberg comments Why ‘Anti-Coercion’ Tool Is the EU’s Trade Weapon of Last Resort

What is the anti-coercion instrument?

It’s the EU’s strongest tool to retaliate against economic or trade duress by a third country. If the bloc decides that it’s being coerced, the ACI would give it cover to hit back with a range of punishments targeting the offending country’s access to one of the world’s biggest and most lucrative markets in goods and services.

The EU sees the ACI’s true purpose not as retaliation so much as deterrence, as its provisions are so potentially damaging to a trade partner that the mere threat of applying it means countries will think twice before using trade as a diplomatic weapon.

What is coercion in trade?

Trade coercion is the practice of applying trade instruments such as tariffs, anti-dumping measures, quotas and other tools that inflict harm on a trade partner for reasons that aren’t justified under the generally accepted rules of international trade, and which don’t directly address any recognized imbalance or injustice in the trading relationship. The goal instead is to impose economic costs on the target in an arbitrary way as part of a broader diplomatic dispute.

The Bloomberg article was written with a focus on, and references to China. The spotlight now is on the US.

Trump has threatened tariffs on eight European countries if they do not agree to let him buy Greenland. That’s coercion.

The stupid part of Trump’s demand is the matter is between Denmark, Greenland, and the US. The EU has no say in the decision.

Tariffs as a Weapon

Trump is repeatedly using tariffs as a weapon, not as a trade matter.

At a minimum he did it to Brazil, India, Canada, Mexico, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, The United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Finland.

Might Supreme Court Justices be editing their opinions over this?

I hope so, but doubt it.

Mark Carney Canadian Prime Minister

Canada Would Fight the US

Carney: “The future of Greenland is a decision for Greenland and for the kingdom of Denmark. We are NATO partners with Denmark and so our full partnership stands. Our obligations on Article 5, Article 2 stand. We stand fully behind them.”

NATO Treaty

NATO’s Article 5 is the cornerstone of collective defense, stating an attack on one member is an attack on all, obligating others to assist (including with armed force if necessary). In contrast, NATO’s Article 2 (often cited as Article II in the Status of Forces Agreement or SOFA) focuses on promoting stability and free institutions, while the treaty’s Article 2 (Washington Treaty) emphasizes economic cooperation and peaceful dispute resolution among members.

NATO Members are obliged to protect Greenland from an invasion by the US.

I cheer Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s forceful stand against Trump.

Denmark Cuts Diplomatic Ties With US