Canada's Trump-Fueled Brain Gain
A year ago, when Timothy Snyder and his wife, Marci Shore, both prominent Yale historians, moved to Canada after being recruited to the University of Toronto, they thought it would be a fun adventure.
'I was trying to have a positive midlife crisis,' Professor Snyder said in an interview.
By the time they had settled into their new home, the mood in the progressive academic circles that feted them back in New Haven, Conn., was rapidly darkening after the election of Donald J. Trump in November.
The Trump administration has put U.S. colleges in its cross hairs, accusing some of cradling haters of America. It has launched policies that threaten to expel international students and jeopardize funding and academic freedoms.
Professors Snyder and Shore, along with Jason Stanley, a Yale philosophy professor who also moved to Toronto, have in recent months become outspoken about the Trump administration.
They published a widely shared New York Times video opinion piece titled, 'We Study Fascism, and We're Leaving the U.S.'
At the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, they joined Brian Rathbun and Nina Srinivasan Rathbun, international relations professors who made a similar move last year from the University of Southern California.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
42 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Donald Trump says he's cutting off trade talks with Canada over Ottawa's digital tax
OTTAWA — U.S. President Donald Trump said Friday that he is cutting off all trade talks with Canada over the federal government's digital services tax that would impact American tech giants, calling it a 'blatant attack' on the United States. Trump announced his plan to end trade talks in a social media post Friday afternoon, less than two weeks after he agreed with Prime Minister Mark Carney at the G7 summit on June 16 to work toward a deal to end the ongoing trade war within 30 days . 'Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately,' Trump's post said. 'We will let Canada know the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period.' The Prime Minister's Office responded later Friday afternoon with a short statement that did not mention the digital services tax and expressed Canada's desire to continue the trade talks. 'The Canadian government will continue to engage in these complex negotiations with the United States in the best interest of Canadian workers and businesses,' the statement said. Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said as recently as two weeks ago that Ottawa would press ahead with the tax, which is set to start collecting money on Monday. Prime Minister Mark Carney comments moments after U.S. President Donald Trump said that he was "terminating all discussions on trade with Canada" and threatened new tariffs over Ottawa's plans to push ahead with a digital services tax. Carney called the negotiations "complex." (June 27, 2025 / The Canadian Press) On social media, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said he was disappointed to hear that trade talks have halted, and that he hopes they resume quickly. He also did not name the digital services tax, but pointed to changes his party has long argued will improve the Canadian economy, including the repeal of the existing federal project assessment regime and industrial carbon pricing. 'As always, Conservatives are ready to help get a good deal for Canada,' Poilievre's statement said. 'We must put Canada first.' Under Trump, the U.S. has imposed a series of tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminum, autos and other goods that Canada views as illegal and unjustified. Ottawa has responded with a raft of counter-tariffs in a trade war that Carney vowed during the spring campaign to 'win.' The prime minister has since embarked on talks with Trump, which Carney said are designed to renegotiate Canada's trade and security relationship with the economic and military juggernaut to the south. Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association, was part of the prime minister's Canada-U.S. council that met virtually on Friday, just as Trump declared he would terminate trade talks. In an interview with the Star, Volpe said he remains cautiously optimistic, and that surprising twists have become an expectation since Trump returned to the White House in January. 'Is this a pressure moment in a negotiation, or is it really the end of the conversation? I don't know. But you know who does know? Donald Trump, who is, in this style of negotiation, a master,' Volpe said. 'Because the prime minister and the president are in direct communication, and have been for the last couple months, I will save my panic for … if the PM suggests we should panic.' Brian Clow, a former deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to prime minister Justin Trudeau, told the Star that it's not surprising Trump would target the tax, which was a trade irritant when Joe Biden was president as well. He urged the Carney government to stay calm and keep trying to talk to its American counterparts. He also said the government should not consider dropping the digital services tax unless the move is part of a broader trade deal with the Trump administration. 'To a certain extent, what we just saw from Donald Trump is exactly from his playbook. We've seen it so many times before,' Clow said. 'This is how he negotiates. He negotiates by threat, attempting to intimidate to yield more concessions from Canada. This is just a part of how it works and they've got to keep talking and hopefully come to some sort of deal.' The trade war has rattled businesses and workers across the country, with layoffs at auto plants and steel factory shutdowns in recent weeks. Trump doubled his steel and aluminum tariffs to 50 per cent against Canada on June 4, arguing the tariffs are needed to protect and promote a key American industry, as his broader policy of tariffs is designed to raise government revenues and overcome what the U.S. president argues is unfair commercial relations for his country. The Liberal government has long planned to impose a tax on digital services, which Trump views as an unfair trade practice that will hit American companies like Google and Meta. In his social media post Friday, Trump alluded to how the European Union is planning a similar digital services tax, and said Canada was 'copying' the bloc of states with 'a direct and blatant attack on our Country.' On Thursday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced that the G7 — a group of rich democracies that includes Canada — agreed to exempt American companies from certain taxes. In return, the Trump administration would remove a so-called 'revenge tax' from a sweeping bill in the U.S. Congress, which would have imposed taxes on investments from countries the U.S. deemed to be treating American firms unfairly. President Donald Trump said he's immediately suspending trade talks with Canada over its plans to continue with its tax on technology firms. Trump said the Canadians was sticking to its plan to impose the tax set to take effect Monday. (AP Video / June 27, 2025) Neither the PMO nor Champagne's office responded Friday when asked if that deal impacted Canada's digital services tax. The policy, enacted in 2024's Digital Services Tax Act , imposed a three per cent tax on revenue earned from online marketing and advertising, social media and some sales of user data. The tax applies to domestic and foreign businesses that reap more than $1.1 billion in global revenue and earn more than $20 million of revenue within Canada in a given year. The Liberals promised to introduce the tax in 2019, and argued hiking tax on big companies could help pay for social services and other public investments to spur the economy. The independent Parliamentary Budget Officer reported in 2023 that the tax would raise about $1.2 billion per year in government revenues. In a written statement Friday, the head of the Business Council of Canada said it has warned the government for the past three years that the digital services tax 'could risk undermining' Canada's economic relationship with the U.S. Goldy Hyder called on Canada to immediately propose to eliminate the tax, in exchange for the removal of American tariffs on Canadian goods. Catherine Cobden, president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Steel Producers Association, said Friday that trade relations are so unpredictable and uncertain with the U.S. that even a new deal to remove current tariffs can no longer be seen as a guarantee. She called for stronger measures to encourage using domestically produced steel in Canada, and other steps to protect the sector. 'We are really under attack by the United States, so we are rapidly pivoting away from that market,' she said. Another business group that has opposed the digital services tax, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said Friday that 'surprises' should be expected in negotiations. 'The tone and tenor of talks has improved in recent months, and we hope to see progress continue,' said the chamber's president, Candace Laing. 'We respect that Team Canada is conducting these negotiations at the table, and we need to give them the space to navigate.'
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
Trump Should Have Never Ditched the Iran Nuclear Deal
Questions remain over the true damage to Iran's nuclear program. But as conflicting comments and reports come in from the Trump Administration and Pentagon intelligence estimates, one thing is certain: Trump's failed diplomacy got us in this mess. I should know. Ten years ago, I was in Vienna as part of the U.S. team negotiating a deal to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Those negotiations culminated in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). It was Trump's decision in 2018 to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal that ultimately led to the perilous situation in the Middle East today. The JCPOA was the result of a sustained campaign of principled, effective U.S. diplomacy. President Obama began laying groundwork for this nuclear deal as soon as he came to office in 2009. His view—shared then and now across the U.S. political spectrum—was that the U.S. cannot accept a nuclear-armed Iran. At the time, Iran claimed that its nuclear energy program was for exclusively peaceful uses. Yet given evidence of Iran's past interest in possessing a nuclear bomb prior to 2003, the U.S. could not take this claim at face value. To get the nuclear deal, Obama and his national security team rallied the world to increase pressure on Tehran. The U.S., E.U., and other allies put in place punishing sanctions. The U.N. Security Council followed suit with a fresh round of sanctions in June 2010 that were wide-ranging and targeted the nuclear program. These sanctions worked: they convinced Iran to come to the negotiating table. To iron out the technical provisions of a deal, the U.S. then put together a team of top career diplomats, nuclear scientists, lawyers, and sanctions experts. It was a remarkable lineup of American patriots and professionals. It was my great honor to serve on that team. Our goal was to offer Iran phased and reversible sanctions relief in exchange for far-reaching limits on Iran's nuclear activities. To maximize leverage, we coordinated with other countries, including not just European allies but also Russia and China. It was difficult, exacting, high-stakes work—for months on end. The effort paid off. Iran agreed to substantial limits on its nuclear activities, including to export out of the country around 98% of its enriched uranium stockpile. Iran's commitments were then subject to intrusive and permanent international monitoring. By the end of the Obama Administration, the deal was working, with all sides implementing their commitments. Trump's abrupt withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 led to the predictable result: Iran's nuclear program surged ahead, breaking free of the deal's constraints. When Trump returned to office in January, he launched a hasty effort to negotiate a new deal. But it bore a striking resemblance to the deal negotiated by Obama, with one nuclear expert calling the Trump framework a 'dollar store JCPOA.' Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu tanked these talks with airstrikes on June 12. The U.S. launched its own strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22. Trump seems convinced the matter is now resolved. But what will be the fate of the tons of enriched uranium that Iran stockpiled after Trump withdrew from the JCPOA? How much Iranian nuclear infrastructure remains intact? Will Iran ever welcome back intrusive international monitoring of its nuclear activities, such as specified in the JCPOA? To resolve these questions, the Trump Administration will need to do the tedious, difficult work of pursuing complex negotiations. Talks look set to resume next week. But it will require a high level of technical expertise and diplomatic capacity. And the timing couldn't be worse, as Trump and Elon Musk's culture war on the so-called 'Deep State' has hollowed out and demoralized the ranks of government experts whose support was critical to achieving the JCPOA in the first place. This sad saga has reminded me of what we've lost in the Trump era. The JCPOA was a product of effective and principled American diplomacy, undertaken in close coordination with our closest allies. It was a team effort by countless government professionals and specialists, all motivated by patriotism and a sense of mission, and operating in an era where they were celebrated not denigrated. It was a victory of dialogue and diplomacy over bluster and bombs. Ten years ago that approach delivered results for the American people and the world. I worry about what comes next.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Final battle damage assessment of US strikes on Iran will be key in US push for Iran nuclear deal
As the Trump administration looks to quickly pivot from military strikes to a diplomatic deal on Iran's nuclear program, the final military and intelligence assessment on the recent US strikes will be critical in informing what the Trump administration needs to accomplish in future Iran negotiations. Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff will need to use that final battle damage assessment – including a detailed summary of the facilities' damage and the locale of the nuclear material – to help formulate the US strategy for diplomatic efforts to completely halt the regime's ability to develop a nuclear weapon in the future, current and former US officials explained. 'You're not going to the negotiation assuming that the other side is going to tell you everything you need to know about the state of their program,' explained Pranay Vaddi, a former senior official for nonproliferation at the National Security Council. 'We need to have a baseline that is established by the US intelligence community before that,' Vaddi added. 'If the Trump administration is committed to some kind of deal still – which it makes statements on – they need to know what they were able to get through military action, compared to what they need to get through the diplomatic process.' President Donald Trump continues to claim that Iran's nuclear program has been 'fully obliterated,' which does not mirror an early assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency, finding that the attack did not destroy the core components of the country's nuclear program. The early assessment has split lawmakers on the effectiveness of the strikes. And Trump's absolutist pronouncements could also complicate Witkoff's job, officials said. Even if the facilities themselves have been badly damaged, it does not mean that the nuclear program itself has been wholly destroyed. Prior to the US strikes, experts and former officials had expressed skepticism about the idea that the nuclear program could be militarily destroyed, noting that there would still be people with the knowledge to support it. 'The basic problem is that the equivalency between the success of the bombing and the success of ending the nuclear program is putting pressure on having this narrative that there isn't a threat,' said Beth Sanner, former deputy director for national intelligence. 'If you think that you've eliminated the nuclear program then you are not dealing with the fact that there is some residual of that program.' And while the final battle damage assessment will be important to take into account, future negotiations with Iran should prioritize getting the UN's nuclear watchdog back on the ground in Iran, said former officials who worked on previous Iran negotiations. 'I don't know that there will be any assessment that I think is fully viable until there are inspectors on the ground,' said a former senior US official who worked on past Iran negotiations. 'We must recreate the kind of intrusive verification and monitoring that was in the 2015 deal.' The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had a presence in Iran before the 2015 nuclear deal signed during the Obama administration – a deal which Trump pulled the US out of during his first term – but the presence of IAEA inspectors in the country drastically increased as a result of that deal. 'The deal meant there were inspectors on the ground 24/7, there was electronic monitoring, there was a process by which – that didn't exist anywhere else in the world – that if there was intelligence about a suspected site, if Iran, over a period of some days, couldn't satisfy the IAEA that there was a reason the IAEA could go and inspect,' the official explained, citing some benefits of the IAEA inspection efforts. But this week the Iranian parliament this week suspended its work with the IAEA, because of the 'regrettable role' played by the agency's chief Rafael Grossi, Iran's foreign minister said. Iran accused Grossi of facilitating the US and Israeli strikes in Iran, citing an IAEA report a day prior to the Israeli strike, which declared Iran was violating its nuclear non-proliferation obligations. This move follows years of Iran making moves to restrict the agency's oversight of it's program. For example, in 2022 Iran responded by removing surveillance cameras from key sites after IAEA censured Iran over uranium particles found at the undeclared sites. The steps that would need to be taken as part of any verifiable deal on Iran's nuclear program would likely include: destroying elements of the program that still exist, monitoring any further activity, blending highly enriched uranium, and declaring parts of the program that are in use. In order to prepare to take those steps, inspectors on the ground would be essential, former officials pressed. 'I think it's been a long time since the US intelligence assessments have been accepted globally as authoritative when it comes to Iran's nuclear program. They would certainly be challenged by Iran. In order to have a successful negotiation everybody needs to at least agree on the source of facts,' said Laura Holgate, the former US Ambassador to the United Nations International Organizations in Vienna. 'The IAEA will be needed to develop a new baseline of what exactly Iran has, where it is, and what its condition is in, and that's going to take time, and it will be based on Iran's cooperation,' Holgate added. With the IAEA access being diminished over the years and virtually nonexistent at this moment, the world now has large gaps in its knowledge of Iran's nuclear inventory. That is particularly true when it comes to the locale of Iran's enriched uranium. Trump administration officials have said in recent days that the stockpile was not moved ahead of the US strikes but the IAEA said Iran may have moved some of the enriched uranium out of the sites before they were attacked. Vice President JD Vance said the day after the strikes that working on what to do about that fuel would be a priority for the US. 'We're going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel. And that's one of the things that we're going to have conversations with the Iranians about,' Vance said. Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, cited the importance of having 'a full accounting' following an all-member classified briefing on Capitol Hill earlier this week. 'There is enriched uranium in the facilities that moves around, but that was not the intent or the mission,' McCaul said. 'We need a full accounting. That's why Iran has to come to the table directly with us, so the IAEA can account for every ounce of enriched uranium that's there, I don't think it's going out of the country, I think it's at the facilities.' The final US military 'battle damage assessment could take days or even weeks to complete,' multiple sources familiar with the Pentagon's process told CNN. CIA Director John Ratcliffe on Wednesday said the agency underscored that a broad intelligence community effort is ongoing to determine the impact of the US strikes on three of the country's nuclear sites on Saturday. The Trump administration was already working on possible terms to offer Iran to bring them back to the able for nuclear deal talks before the US military strikes occurred. But if they are able to pull Iran back to the table, they will have to then enter into much more technical talks to put a legitimate and verifiable deal into place. 'I think that you want to strike while the iron is hot, to try and get them to the table while they're feeling weak,' Sanner said. 'One of the key requirements for the negotiation is setting mechanisms for cataloging Iran's residual capabilities in order to have that conversation and ultimately a deal that is worth the paper it is written on.'
