How Europe can lead in the age of Trump
First, take climate change. Trump's impact on climate change itself can only be negative. Nevertheless, his reversal of the US move away from fossils opens an opportunity for Europe and Asia. Necessity is the mother of invention, and by sticking with fossil fuels, Trump is removing the need for the US to adapt. Now is the chance for Europe and Asia to make the innovations that are needed if the world is to survive.
Second, take the uncertainty for business investment that a Trump presidency creates. Who will be holding his hand as he signs yet more executive orders – the traditional MAGA crowd, or the techies? No-one knows. It may well flip from one to the other and back.
Then add in boom and bust. Business will hate this uncertainty. Thus the more stable Europe can seem, the more attractive it becomes. This will be difficult for the EU right now, given the uncertain political climate in France and Germany, but it could be a good moment for the UK.
Third, consider the position of skilled labour and, most especially, high-end, talented immigrants. Just think of the many clever people in Silicon valley and the top US universities who now fear for their future. European universities and European high-tech firms are in a perfect position to gain from this – provided they have the sense to be welcoming.
Think finally about where Europe's comparative advantage lies. The language in Brussels currently emphasises the need for Europe to be 'more competitive'. Translated, this means more deregulation. But, in many areas this will be exactly the wrong move. The question to ask is 'Why does the regulation exist?' If it is for a good purpose you want to promote it – indeed to sell it – not abandon it.
For example, no-one wants their kids harassed with pornographic images, or their social media flooded with hate speech. We regulate against these practices for good reason. Similarly, the evidence of the damage to our health was there for cigarettes and will soon be there for ultra-processed foods. In other words, Europe should emphasise why standards matter to everyone. Well-chosen standards, not our lack of competitiveness, have the scope to be our comparative advantage.
Trump's erratic door slamming opens many opportunities. Europe needs to get on the front foot and take them.
Dr Andrew Graham is Chair of the Trustees of the Europaeum, and former Master of Balliol College, Oxford
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Trump wants to roll back $7 billion in grants for solar projects in low-income communities
The Trump administration is reportedly considering terminating a $7 billion grant program aimed at helping low- and moderate-income families install home solar panels, part of the White House's larger campaign to claw back billions in Biden-era climate spending. The Environmental Protection Agency is in the process of drafting termination letters to the 60 state agencies, nonprofit groups, and Native American tribes awarded the funding through the Solar for All initiative, part of the Biden administration's landmark 2022 climate law. The agency said Tuesday it has not made a final decision about the grants. Environmental groups say if Trump does go through with the cancellation, the effort will face legal challenges. Wiping away the grants would halt many projects before they were complete. The first Solar for All projects, efforts to install residential solar and battery storage systems for tribal communities in Montana and South Dakota, went online in October 2024. 'One in five households on reservations lack access to electricity, and this program was an opportunity to close that gap,' Cody Two Bears, the chief executive of Indigenized Energy, told The New York Times, which first reported on the cancellation effort. 'But those were just two kickoff projects to show what was coming for the next five years.' Critics of the Trump administration and climate experts said cancelling the grants, which were projected to serve about 900,000 people, would be bad public policy that hurts low-income families and the climate. 'Solar for All is laser focused on helping nearly a million low-income families afford electricity at a time when their bills keep going up,' Zealan Hoover, the EPA's former director of implementation, told The Washington Post. 'If the Trump administration is serious about energy abundance and affordability, then they should be working hard to accelerate — not terminate — these grants.' 'Solar for All means lower utility bills, many thousands of good-paying jobs and real action to address the existential threat of climate change,' Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who championed the program, said in a statement on Tuesday. 'At a time when working families are getting crushed by skyrocketing energy costs and the planet is literally burning, sabotaging this program isn't just wrong — it's absolutely insane.' In March, the EPA said it was terminating a separate pot of $20 billion in climate funding, prompting a legal challenge. In April, a federal judge issued an injunction siding with grant recipients. The administration's One, Big Beautiful Bill spending package, signed in July, repealed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, the single largest portion of climate money under the Biden law, and ordered any unassigned funds back to the U.S. Treasury. There is an ongoing legal battle between grantees and the federal government over the fate of much of the IRA's climate funding. Grantees say much of the funds were legally obligated before Trump took office and immune from presidential action, while the administration claims it claw the funds back.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
US judge blocks Trump officials from diverting disaster prevention grants
A federal judge blocked the Trump administration on Tuesday from diverting funds from a multibillion-dollar grant program designed to protect communities against natural disasters. US district judge Richard Stearns in Boston issued a preliminary injunction preventing the government from spending money allocated to the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (Bric) program for other purposes. Twenty mostly Democratic-led states sued the administration last month, saying the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) lacked power to cancel the Bric program without congressional approval. Fema is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Neither agency immediately responded to requests for comment. Created in 2018 during Donald Trump's first term, the Bric program helps state and local governments protect major infrastructure such as roads and bridges before the occurrence of floods, hurricanes and other disasters. According to the lawsuit, Fema approved about $4.5bn in grants for nearly 2,000 projects, primarily in coastal states, over the last four years. But the agency announced in April it would end the program, calling it wasteful, ineffective and politicized. Stearns said that while Fema does not appear to have since canceled grants, states should not have to wait to sue until after they lose funding, while the cancellation of new grants suggested Fema considered an eventual shutdown a fait accompli. He also said the states have shown a realistic chance of irreparable harm if the Bric program ended. 'There is an inherent public interest in ensuring that the government follows the law, and the potential hardship accruing to the states from the funds being repurposed is great,' the judge wrote. 'The Bric program is designed to protect against natural disasters and save lives,' Stearns added. 'The potential hardship to the government, in contrast, is minimal.' Led by Massachusetts and Washington, the 20 states that sued also include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin. The offices of Massachusetts' and Washington's attorneys general had no immediate comment.
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
Three years into war, US and Europe keep billions in trade with Russia
Aug 5 (Reuters) - Three years after Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the United States and European Union still import billions of euros worth of Russian energy and commodities, ranging from liquefied natural gas to enriched uranium. India this week lashed out at what it called Western double standards, after facing renewed threats from U.S. President Donald Trump over its surging purchases of Russian crude oil. Here are the main commercial ties that the U.S., Europe, and India maintain with Russia, and their evolution over the last four years: Since the beginning of the war, trade between the EU and Russia has drastically contracted due to EU sanctions and import restrictions on some products. Imports from Russia fell by 86% from the first quarter of 2022 through the first quarter of this year, according to the latest data from Eurostat. Imports of goods from Russia in the first quarter of 2025 totaled 8.74 billion euros ($10.11 billion), down from 30.58 billion euros four years earlier. Since January 2022, the EU has imported 297 billion euros' worth of Russian goods. The EU, however, continues to purchase oil, nickel, natural gas, fertilizer, iron, and steel from Russia. Four years ago, Russia was the largest supplier of petroleum products to the EU, but the EU ban on maritime imports of Russian crude oil reduced its share to 2.01% in 2025 from 28.74% in 2021. Oil imports fell to 1.48 billion euros in the first quarter of 2025 from 14.06 billion euros four years ago. Russia's share in natural gas plummeted to 17% in the first quarter of 2025 from 48% in 2021's first quarter. Russia's share in non-EU iron and steel imports slumped to 7.71% in the first quarter of 2025 from 18.28% four years ago. As for fertilizers, a sector in which the European Parliament voted in May to impose prohibitive tariffs, Russia remained, as of the first quarter of 2025, the largest exporter to the European Union. Its share fell slightly from 28.15% to 25.62% in the last four years. In contrast to Europe, India's imports from Moscow surged to $65.7 billion in 2024 from $8.25 billion in 2021, data from the Indian Commerce Ministry website showed. Crude oil has been the biggest driver of the growth in India's imports from Russia, jumping to $52.2 billion in 2024 from $2.31 billion in 2021. India's imports of coal and coal-related products from Russia surged to $3.5 billion from $1.12 billion in 2021. India's fertilizer imports from Russia rose to $1.67 billion in 2024 from $483 million in 2021. U.S. imports, opens new tab from Russia fell to $2.50 billion in the first half of 2025 from $14.14 billion four years earlier, according to U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis data. Since January 2022, the U.S. has imported $24.51 billion of Russian goods. Last year, the U.S. imported around $1.27 billion of Russian fertilizers, up slightly from $1.14 billion in 2021. The U.S. imported enriched uranium and plutonium from Russia worth around $624 million in 2024, down from $646 million in 2021. Russia exported palladium to the United States for around $878 million in 2024, down from $1.59 billion in 2021. ($1 = 0.8641 euros)
