How Europe Got Stuck Between Xi's China and Trump's America
It hasn't turned out that way.
Instead, the European Union finds itself in a geopolitical chokehold between the world's two largest economies.
In Brussels, officials are trying to secure a rough trade deal with their American counterparts before Mr. Trump hits the bloc with high, across-the-board tariffs that could clobber the bloc's economy. At the same time, European Union policymakers are trying to prod their counterparts in Beijing to stop supporting Russia, to stop helping Chinese industry with so much state money and to slow the flow of cheap goods into the European Union.
But at a moment of upheaval in the global trading system, the bloc also needs to keep its relationship with China, the world's leading manufacturing superpower, on a relatively stable footing.
Leaders from the European Union are scheduled to be in Beijing for a summit in late July, plans for which have been in flux. Hopes for the gathering are low. Even as China pushes the idea that Mr. Trump's hostility to multilateral trade is prodding Europe into its arms, Europe's problems with China are only growing.
'There is no China card for Europe,' said Liana Fix, a fellow for Europe at the Council on Foreign Relations.
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
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Most humbling thing I've ever seen': Ford CEO sounds alarm on China's EV dominance — what that means for you
Ford CEO Jim Farley didn't mince words at the recent Aspen Ideas Festival, describing China's rapid rise in the electric vehicle (EV) market as the 'most humbling experience' of his career. "Their cost, their quality of their vehicles is far superior to what I see in the west." Farley said. Chinese automakers like BYD have pulled ahead with vertically integrated supply chains, efficient production and government support. They're pumping out reliable EVs at prices that make even budget-conscious U.S. models look expensive — including the new BYD Seagull, priced under $10,000 USD. "We are in a global competition with China, and it's not just EVs. And if we lose this, we do not have a future Ford," Farley said. I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 6 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it For U.S. consumers, this isn't just about bragging rights in the global auto race. It's about what you'll pay for your next vehicle. If Chinese EVs enter Western markets without tariffs, they could undercut competitors by tens of thousands of dollars — bringing huge savings to consumers but serious threats to U.S. auto industry jobs. In response, the U.S. government has already imposed steep tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, which may shield domestic automakers for now but also delay price competition. Farley's warning comes as more and more Americans are looking to switch to EVs amid soaring gas prices and expanding charging infrastructure. But since Tesla, Ford and GM EVs often start in the $40,000-$60,000 range, many Americans are priced out. Read more: No millions? No problem. With as little as $10, here's of diversified assets usually only available to major players China's advantage? It controls much of the world's battery production and can bring new EVs to market in a fraction of the time compared to U.S. automakers. Ford is working on a next-gen affordable EV platform intended to match China's costs but says it won't arrive until 2027. Tesla is also aiming to launch a $25,000 'Model 2,' but timelines remain uncertain. Until then, the price gap persists. One other fact is that Apple and Google just "decided not to go into the car business," according to Farley. This has created significant barriers to the U.S. competing with the level of technological integration made available in Chinese vehicles. "They have far superior in-vehicle technology. Huawei and Xiaomi are in every car," Farley added. "You get in, you don't have to pair your phone. Automatically, your whole digital life is mirrored in the car." For now, U.S. car buyers won't see sub-$20,000 EVs on the lot — but pressure is mounting. Here's how to stay ahead: Watch for incentives: Federal EV tax credits can ease the price of U.S.-made electric cars. Consider used EVs: As more models hit the market, prices on pre-owned electric cars are dropping. Just make sure you double-check the battery warranty before buying used. Plan long-term: If you're planning to switch to electric in the next few years, competition and innovation may bring prices down — eventually. Ford and Farley are painfully aware that market dynamics are shifting. And for American drivers, the race to affordable EVs is on. This tiny hot Costco item has skyrocketed 74% in price in under 2 years — but now the retail giant is restricting purchases. Here's how to buy the coveted asset in bulk Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Money doesn't have to be complicated — sign up for the free Moneywise newsletter for actionable finance tips and news you can use. This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. Sign in to access your portfolio
Associated Press
28 minutes ago
- Associated Press
The Kevin Durant trade to Houston sees seven teams involved in the record-setting deal
Kevin Durant's trade to the Houston Rockets is official and officially record-setting. The deal got approved by the NBA on Sunday as part of a seven-team transaction, one in which a slew of other trade agreements got folded into one massive package. 'Kevin impacts the game on both ends of the court and is one of the most efficient scorers in the history of basketball,' Rockets general manager Rafael Stone said. 'We liked the growth our team showed last season and believe Kevin's skill set will integrate seamlessly.' Involved in the deal: Phoenix, Houston, Atlanta, Minnesota, Golden State, Brooklyn and the Los Angeles Lakers. It includes a total of 13 players — the headline moves include Durant going to Houston from Phoenix, the Rockets sending Jalen Green and Dillon Brooks to the Suns, and the Rockets acquiring Clint Capela from the Hawks. The seven-team involvement in the Durant trade tops the previous record, a six-team transaction last summer that most notably sent Klay Thompson to the Dallas Mavericks. Golden State — Thompson's former team — obviously was another part of that trade, as were Charlotte, Minnesota, Philadelphia and Denver on varying levels. 'One of the greatest to ever play the game, we are grateful for the impact Kevin made on our organization and in our community,' Phoenix general manager Brian Gregory said of Durant. 'As a member of the Suns, he climbed the scoring charts to become just the eighth player in NBA history to score 30,000 career points, and we wish him the best as he continues his career in Houston.' There will be at least five second-round draft picks in the deal before all terms are satisfied, the potential for another second-round pick swap and the Hawks and Timberwolves both had to receive some cash considerations to make all the math work. And some of those draft picks won't actually be made until 2032, which raises the serious possibility that some players who will go down in history as being part of the trade haven't reached high school yet. Durant averaged 26.6 points last season, his 17th in the NBA — not counting one year missed because of injury. For his career, the 6-foot-11 forward is averaging 27.2 points and seven rebounds per game. The move brings Durant back to the state of Texas, where he played his only year of college basketball for the Longhorns and was the college player of the year before going as the No. 2 pick in the 2007 draft by Seattle. Houston becomes his fifth franchise, joining the SuperSonics (who then became the Oklahoma City Thunder), Golden State, Brooklyn and Phoenix. Durant won his two titles with the Warriors in 2017 and 2018, and last summer in Paris he became the highest-scoring player in U.S. Olympic basketball history and the first men's player to be part of four gold-medal teams. Durant is a four-time scoring champion, a two-time Finals MVP and one of eight players in NBA history with more than 30,000 career points. 'Having played against Kevin and coached him before, I know he's the type of competitor who fits with what we've been building here in Houston,' Rockets coach Ime Udoka said. 'His skill level, love of basketball, and dedication to his craft have made him one of the most respected players of his generation, and my staff and I are excited to work with him.' Houston sent Green and Brooks to Phoenix, along with the rights to Khaman Maluach from last month's draft, a second-round pick in 2026 and another second-rounder in 2032. The Hawks got David Roddy, cash and a 2031 second-round pick swap from the Rockets. Brooklyn gets a 2026 second-round pick and another in 2030 from the Rockets, and the Warriors received the rights to Jahmai Mashack from last month's draft. ___ AP NBA:
Miami Herald
31 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Did the president drop an f-bomb? Yes, and Democrats are doing it too
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who started in politics as a young legislative aide and is now the senior Democrat in Florida's congressional delegation, has for years calibrated her statements, carefully choosing her words to communicate exactly the message she intends. Recently, speaking at the Broward Democratic Party's annual fundraising dinner, she used blunt - shocking to some - language to convey the threat she said was emanating from President Donald Trump's policies. "F-," she said. More than once. Wasserman Schulz declared that Democrats would "fight to our last breath, and we'll go to the f-ing mat." There has been a clear coarsening of political language: Words that once were widely seen as off-limits, other than behind closed doors or in small groups, are now more common - an extra tool to convey anger and frustration. At another point in the Broward fundraising dinner, Wasserman Schultz decried what she said Trump and Republicans are doing. She asked the audience of 300, "Are we going to let them do that, Broward County?" "No," people in the audience responded. To which the congresswoman replied with an emphatic "f- no!" "This has been building up in me for a long time. So forgive me," she added. Wasserman Schultz later explained the word wasn't in her prepared remarks but said the gravity of the threat the nation is facing in 2025 warranted an expression that once would have been stunning in a public setting. Trump There's no more prominent public user of the f-word and others once widely seen as off-limits than the president. Most recently, on June 24 he was expressing his displeasure with Iran and Israel. "We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f- they're doing. Do you understand that?" His use of the word in regard to Iran and Israel - speaking on the lawn of the White House - attracted massive attention, but he's no stranger to the public use of four-letter words. "More than any other president, Trump has been known to use coarse language in speeches and other public appearances. But even for him, this on-camera utterance of the f-word was new. American presidents have typically refrained from using it publicly, even when angry or frustrated," NPR reported. Just before last year's election, the New York Times reported that a computer search found he had used curses at least 140 times in public last year, not counting words such as "damn" and "hell" that are much tamer to many people. A review of Trump's speech at the 2024 Conservative Political Action Conference found he used epithets 44 times, the Times reported. Perhaps the most famous previous use of the f-word came from Joe Biden, then the vice president, who told President Barack Obama that his 2010 signing the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, into law was "a big f-ing deal." One big difference: Biden whispered it to Obama and meant it to be private, but it was picked up on an open mic. Critics at the time suggested it was an example of Biden's tendency toward gaffes; years later some supporters were more positive about what they called the BFD moment. Democrats join After 10 years of Trump dominating and altering the nation's political discourse, Democrats' language is now changing. "In some ways the Democrats have been slower, particularly in the Trump era, to adopt the attention-gaining messaging that Donald Trump has really leaned into," said Joshua Scacco, an association professor of communication at the University of South Florida. "It does seem like the Trump era is catching up to Democrats in terms of how they're responding, in terms of how they're adapting their own messaging." Scacco, who specializes in political communication and media content, is also founder and director of the university's Center for Sustainable Democracy. At a Florida Democratic Party dinner gala, which fell between Wasserman Schultz's and Trump's use of the f-word, U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz was delivering remarks to an audience of 800. The Broward-Palm Beach County congressman described what would happen when lawmakers returned to Washington to take up the measure the Republican majority passed on July 3, the legislation named "Big Beautiful Bill" at Trump's behest. "They're going to try to pass the big beautiful bulls- of a bill," Moskowitz said. Wasserman Schultz has regularly used the term "DOGEbags" to describe the people dispatched under the Trump presidency to fan out through federal agencies as part of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency effort formerly led by billionaire Elon Musk to eliminate programs and slash spending. On Monday, Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and former Republican governor of South Dakota, said she was looking forward to a visit with Trump the next day to the detention center for illegal immigrants pending deportation that Florida has established in the Everglades. In an official statement attributed to Noem and distributed by the agency, she said the detention center would allow the government to lock up "some of the worst scumbags" in the country. Divergent reactions The responses to use of one of the terms that still can't be printed or aired in most mainstream news outlets often depends on the affiliation of the person who uttered the word. After Trump used the word, his firmness and resolve was heralded by a host on Fox, the favored cable news outlet for Republicans. A "very frustrated" president used "salty language," she said. Minutes later, the same Fox host professed outrage at a Democrat's use of the term. She said she was "repulsed" by the user's "foul mouth." The contradictory reactions were so extreme that it prompted mockery online and a video of excerpts calling out Fox from a host at competitor CNN. On Wednesday, as the U.S. House of Representatives debated the big bill to cut taxes, cut social program spending, provide more money for immigration enforcement and the military, and increase the federal debt, Democrats professed outrage. U.S. Rep. Josh Riley, D-N.Y., ran through a litany of objections, before delivering his summary. "Don't tell me you give a s- about the middle class when all you're doing is s-ting on the middle class," he said on the floor of the U.S. House. That produced a tut-tut from U.S. Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., who was presiding over the House at the time. "Avoid vulgar speak. We do have families" present. U.S. Rep. Virginia Fox, R-N.C., chair of the House Rules Committee, echoed the reminder about "the language we should be using in this chamber." The admonishment prompted what was, in effect, a verbal eye roll from U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, top Democrat on the Rules Committee. "I hope that when the president comes here next, you'll admonish him for the language he uses." Driving the change Several factors are propelling the increasing use of coarse language by Democrats, Scacco said. It's more than simply imitating Trump, he said. The language in question "has a lot of anger in it, a lot of emotional appeal. Democratic messaging has often seemed bloodless in comparison, lacked feeling," he said. "Anger is a very effective emotion in mobilizing people and getting them to perk up a bit. That's what you see here is the use of emotion in sort of that strategic manner, being angry here, frustration," Scacco said. Scacco is co-author of the book "The Ubiquitous Presidency: Presidential Communication and Digital Democracy in Tumultuous Times." "I think that for their base that they're communicating. Their base wants to see that they are clued in to what's going on. And so swearing and that emotional language I think communicates to the base that their elected officials understand the gravity and the magnitude of what's happening," he said. Part of why it seems jarring is that the Democrats under Biden's presidency and for years under an older generation of party leaders in Congress generally stuck with "that sort of more civil, decorous politics" - before they were swept away by Trump and his political movement. Rick Hoye, chair of the Broward Democratic Party, said the kind of language that's used publicly today by some elected officials is different than what he heard when he first got involved in politics in 2009. Hoye said it is both a symptom of the gravity of how strongly Democrats feel and a response to the yearning by many in the party's base that leaders do something to convey how strongly they feel. "For our folks they're just tired. They're just expressing their frustration, the frustration that is felt on the ground," Hoye said. "Democrats like people that are aggressive and fight back." Hoye said Democratic elected officials are "expressing the frustrations of everyday Democrats." He said voters "probably appreciate the fact that their elected officials are fed up and they're speaking a language that everyone feels," adding that "the plain-spoken language lets constituents know that they're on the ground for them." "Our leaders have realized that if they don't fight like this, the average people will get discouraged and feel that they're not really in tune with their struggles and their sentiments. And the Democratic party doesn't want to risk losing contact with the people that we need to show up." That assessment was reflected in a reaction to one of Wasserman Schultz's strong comments at the Broward Democrats dinner. "Excuse my French," she said, prompting a shout from the audience: "Love it. We speak French." Larry Snowden, president of Club 47, the South Florida-based mega-sized club of Trump supporters, said the president is unique. "He's been using those words for a long time," he said, adding the Democrats seem to be attempting to emulate something that works for Trump. "They're in shambles. Why wouldn't you try to be like your opponent." Michele Merrell, the elected state Republican committeewoman from Broward County, said she doesn't think the language that works for Trump necessarily works for others in politics, and definitely not in her view the Democrats. "No one can out-Trump Trump," she said. "I see Democratic and Republican candidates try to emulate him," she said. 'I see various candidates try to copy his way of communicating, and it doesn't really come across. I don't think there's anyone who can replicate what he does." News coverage Such language was once much more hidden from the public. Two generations ago, one of the more shocking elements in the transcripts of then-President Richard Nixon's tapes was his frequent use of profanity. That's how the phrase "expletive deleted" came into common parlance for a time; it was the phrase inserted in brackets to replace Nixon's frequent use of vulgarities. Even the Richard Nixon Foundation, on its website, acknowledged "RN's unfortunate weakness for expletives." One big difference: Those were words he used in meetings and on the phone, not in widely seen public settings. And the actual words didn't get reported. Today, Scacco said, strong language is a tool that the party out of power - the Democrats - can use to "gain attention in an environment where people are not focused on them." By using earthy language, he said, "you attract the attention of journalists who are doing the story, and also people." How to report such language is tricky for the news media. Traditionally such words haven't been published or aired in mainstream outlets that sought to uphold what once was seen as a standard of decorum. But when they're uttered by major political figures, are all over social media, and when livesteams go out online and on cable television, the calculation about preserving the public's innocence isn't as clear. "Mainstream outlets generally don't include profanity in their news reports," wrote the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, a nonprofit based in St. Petersburg. Poynter found a range of usage decisions about Trump's use of the word. Some news organizations avoided the word in text, but used it in video. Others used the word. Some didn't use it in either video or print. Many used hyphens or asterisks to replace some of the word's letters. The Associated Press Stylebook cautions against using such terms in articles unless there is a compelling reason. The AP used "f" and asterisks in text and bleeped the word on video. In an article published in June before Trump used the word, the New York Times explained its policy that publishing such terms "should be rare. We maintain a steep threshold for vulgar words. There are times, however, when publishing an offensive expression is necessary for a reader's understanding of what is being reported" which may include "reporting vulgarities uttered by powerful public figures and wielded in a public setting." When published, the Times wrote "we typically confine it to a single reference, and avoid using it in headlines, news alerts or social media posts." The complexity of the question was laid out in the headline of a Poynter analysis: "What do you do when the president drops an f-bomb?" _____ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
