Can Labour government usher in a new era of UK-Arab engagement?

Analysis Can Labour government usher in a new era of UK-Arab engagement?
The message for Labour’s Keir Starmer is that Britain’s sizable Muslim community has found its voice and its political power, and its support can no longer be taken for granted. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 09 July 2024
Follow

Can Labour government usher in a new era of UK-Arab engagement?

Can Labour government usher in a new era of UK-Arab engagement?
  • Some experts think policy focus will shift from migration, counterextremism to Palestine, closer Gulf ties
  • Loud and clear election message is that support of Britain’s Muslim community cannot be taken for granted

LONDON: Before last Thursday, few British voters outside of the east London constituency of Ilford North had heard of Leanne Mohamad, the independent candidate running for election in the seat held by one of the Labour Party’s biggest names.

Mohamad’s name was no better known after the election, in which Wes Streeting, Labour’s shadow health secretary, held on to the seat he had captured from the Conservatives in 2015.

But the success of the 23-year-old British-Palestinian in coming within a whisker of defeating Streeting was one of several warning shots fired across the bows of a Labour Party which has now woken up to the fact that the UK’s Muslim community might have an equal or even greater say in its chances of remaining in power for more than one term as the UK Jewish lobby, which the party has spent the past five years courting assiduously.

Streeting, who is now Labour’s new health secretary, squeezed back in by just 528 votes — 15,647 to Mohamad’s 15,119 — an unprecedented collapse of support over a single issue of foreign policy.

He was not the only senior party member who felt the wrath of the Muslim community and its supporters over Labour’s half-hearted stance on Gaza.




Labour’s new prime minister is on tricky ground over Gaza. (Reuters)

In the constituency of Holborn & St. Pancras, even Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer’s 2019 majority of 36,641 was slashed in half.

His chief opponent was another independent, Andrew Feinstein, a former South African politician and the son of a Holocaust survivor who criticized Starmer’s pre-election position on Gaza, having previously argued that the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement is “a peaceful mechanism to weaken and thus force concessions from” an “apartheid Israel.”

Over 120 miles north in Birmingham Ladywood, long-serving Labour MP Shabana Mahmood, who secured 79 percent of the constituency’s votes in 2019, saw her majority cut in half and almost equaled by Akhmed Yakoob, yet another pro-Palestinian independent candidate.

In the neighboring constituency of Birmingham Yardley, Labour’s Jess Phillips saw her 2019 majority of 10,659 slashed to fewer than 700 votes by newcomer Jody McIntyre, running for the Workers Party.

Her setback came her November 2023 resignation from the shadow cabinet in protest over her party’s stance on the Israel-Hamas conflict, declaring she had to vote “with my constituents, my head, and my heart, which has felt as if it were breaking over the last four weeks with the horror of the situation in Israel and Palestine.”




The new health secretary, Wes Streeting, narrowly escaped defeat to Pro-Palestine independent Leanne Mohamad. (Reuters)

And they were the lucky ones. In 21 seats in the UK where more than one-fifth of the population is Muslim, Labour saw its share of the vote fall by 25 percent, and four MPs lost their seats to independents on pro-Gaza tickets.

The message for Labour, which has been received loud and clear, is that Britain’s sizable Muslim community has found its voice and its political power, and its support can no longer be taken for granted.

As Shabana Mahmood said after holding on to her Birmingham Ladywood seat, “we have bridges to rebuild … we have trust that we must earn back from my own community.”

There are already signs that Britain’s new government, whose program of social and economic reform is dependent upon securing a second term in office five years from now, is taking steps to do just that.

Starmer, whose wife is Jewish, inherited the leadership of the Labour Party in April 2020 from Jeremy Corbyn, a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause whose five years as leader were overshadowed by persistent accusations that the party he presided over was antisemitic — allegations that Corbyn and his supporters saw as an orchestrated campaign motivated by Labour’s support for Palestine.




Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause, regained his seat as an independent candidate. (Reuters)

A report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the UK’s human rights watchdog, published in October 2020, concluded there were “serious failings in the Labour Party leadership in addressing antisemitism and an inadequate process for handling antisemitism complaints.”

The report had a Catch-22 air about it, concluding as it did that Labour’s protestations that the multiple accusations of antisemitism against it — from organizations including the Jewish Labour Movement, the Campaign Against Antisemitism and Jewish Voice for Labour — were manufactured smears, was, in itself, evidence of antisemitism.

Starmer set out to rebuild the trust of the Jewish community, declaring that he would “tear out this poison by its roots and judge success by the return of Jewish members.”

It seems to have worked. In the 2019 general election an estimated 11 percent of British Jews voted Labour; last Thursday it was closer to 50 percent.




Staremer, whose wife is Jewish, told The Guardian, “half of the family are Jewish, they’re either here or in Israel.” (AFP)

But Labour’s new prime minister is on tricky ground over Gaza. As he told The Guardian in an interview last month, “half of the family are Jewish, they’re either here or in Israel.”

Now that the election is over, and his party has been badly bruised at the ballot box by the perception that it has turned its back on the plight of the Palestinians, a cause traditionally close to Labour’s heart, Starmer faces the puzzle of how to retain UK Jewish support while bringing Muslims back on board.

“Labour has been very vocal about the need to counter antisemitism, and this now puts it in a very awkward position,” Kelly Petillo, program manager for the Middle East and North Africa at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told Arab News.

“On the one hand, they have portrayed themselves as the people who are going to clean up the Labour Party, but on the other they have to grapple with the reality that many independent candidates won because Labour’s stance on the war in Gaza was unsatisfactory for many.”

It is possible, she believes, that Labour will tread water on the issue of Gaza and the broader question of Palestinian statehood until the outcome of November’s presidential election in the US is settled.




Israel has been conducting a devestating military assault on the Gaza Strip since October last year. (AFP)

If, as seems increasingly likely, Donald Trump returns to the presidency, “there could well be alignment with the Trump administration, leading to a bias toward Israel, which is already evident in the nature of some of the candidates Labour selected to run in the election.”

For example, one of Labour’s new parliamentarians is Luke Akehurst, the MP for North Durham and former director of the pro-Israeli activist group We Believe in Israel, who has described Israel’s actions in Gaza as proportionate.

But for now, at least, the new UK government’s foreign policy is already showing signs of taking a turn for the pro-Palestinian.

Before the election, the then Conservative government had challenged the decision by the International Criminal Court to consider approving the chief prosecutor’s request for arrest warrants to be issued against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, for alleged war crimes in Gaza.

The UK questioned the ICC’s jurisdiction in the case, but the new Labour-led government has hinted it may withdraw the objection.




Israel’s military campaign in the Palestinian enclave has killed more than 35,000 people. (AFP)

The news leaked after two early calls to leaders in the region by Starmer. In one, he spoke to Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, expressing his concern about “the ongoing suffering and devastating loss of life” in Gaza, and restating the support for a Palestinian state that David Lammy, his foreign secretary, had already articulated.

Starmer’s other call was to Netanyahu. According to a Labour transcript, the new prime minister spoke of the “clear and urgent” need for a ceasefire in Gaza, adding that it was “also important to ensure the long-term conditions for a two-state solution were in place, including ensuring the Palestinian Authority had the financial means to operate effectively.”

Opinion

This section contains relevant reference points, placed in (Opinion field)

Starmer also urged the Israeli leader to act with caution in his dealings with Hezbollah on Israel’s northern border.

Meanwhile, Lammy has said that the Labour administration will reexamine legal advice given to the Conservative government that UK arms being sold to Israel were not being used in breach of international humanitarian law.

Lammy has also suggested the UK might reverse its decision to stop funding UNRWA, the UN’s Palestinian relief agency. In January, major donors to the agency, including the US, the EU, the UK and Germany, withdrew funding when it emerged that a dozen of UNRWA’s 30,000 Palestinian employees were suspected of having been involved in the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel.




Britain’s newly appointed Foreign Secretary David Lammy leaves Downing Street. (Reuters)

By April, most of this international funding had been restored and “the UK is now in the weird position where it is one of the few countries that has not restored UNRWA funding,” said Petillo.

Despite Lammy’s pronouncements, “I think Starmer is being advised internally to delay this as much as possible, keeping the UK in line with the US, which has blocked it until March 2025. This type of deflection is probably a tactic they will use to address some of the domestic tensions they are under.”

Because of this and other issues, UK policy in the Middle East “will continue to be dictated to a certain extent by US politics and the US line; you could argue that we won’t see a huge change from foreign policy in this area under the Conservatives.

“On the other hand, one can anticipate change just because the bar set by the Conservative government was so low, partly because of all the distractions they have faced, but also because of the narrow lens through which they have looked at Middle East policy, focused mostly on migration and countering extremism and, of course, through a reduction in aid budgets, which has affected countries like Yemen and Syria massively.”




Smoke billows during Israeli bombardment on the village of Khiam in south Lebanon near the border with Israel. (AFP)

Lammy has already made plain that Labour intends to reengage with the Middle East through a new policy of what he called “progressive realism,” and has also spoken of the need for the UK to mend relations with the Arab Gulf states.

This would be timely and highly welcome in the region, said Petillo.

“The UK has definitely shifted its attention a bit away from the region,” she said. “It was a big part of the international support for Ukraine and lately has been looking at the Gulf states solely through the narrow lens of energy.

FASTFACTS

• SR83.31bn Total Saudi-UK trade in goods and services in 2023.

• SR116.54bn Total UK-UAE trade in goods and services in 2023.

•SR37.56bn Total UK-Qatar trade in goods and services in 2023.

“This has really frustrated the Gulf countries, but Lammy has been traveling to the region, even before the war in Gaza, to address this grievance, and since then has been using the war as an opportunity to widen the conversation.

“There is a conversation right now among the Gulf states about building a regional security architecture, into which the process of Arab-Israeli normalization fits, and the new UK government is very keen to enter this conversation in a way that the Conservatives were not.”




Rishi Sunak’s Conservative Party lost power in an election landslide to Labour. (Reuters)

The new UK government, Lina Khatib, director of the SOAS Middle East Institute and associate Fellow of the Chatham House Middle East and North Africa Program, told Arab News, “has the mandate to implement the needed foreign policy resets that the Labour party had prioritized ahead of the general election. Repairing relations with Arab countries in the Gulf and taking action toward a ceasefire in Gaza and resurrecting the Israel-Palestine peace process are two such priorities.”

According to Khatib, Labour has “rightly framed the Gulf as an important partner for security and economic growth.

“However, the UK government must pursue a more comprehensive strategy toward the Gulf which also takes into consideration the region’s geopolitical interests,” she said.

“This includes adopting a bold approach in addressing the destabilizing role of Iran and its proxies in the Middle East, which the previous UK government had merely skirted around.”




Labour will tread water on the issue of Gaza until the outcome of November’s presidential election in the US is settled, analyst Kelly Petillo indicated.

The UK “must also strengthen its diplomatic, cultural, and business engagement with the Middle East and North Africa. This will help nurture areas of growth across those sectors in the region and bolster the UK’s own standing.”The Labour Middle East Council, established in January this year by British politicians and former ambassadors to the region, with “the fundamental goal of cultivating understanding and fostering enduring relationships between UK parliamentarians and the Middle East & North Africa,” was “one avenue for facilitating such engagement.”

Two perspectives on a historic relationship


MIRAN HASSAN, Founder and director, Labour Middle East Council

It’s about treating the UK-Gulf relationship with more respect and giving it the attention that it deserves. For example, if you look at the GCC-UK Free Trade Agreement, those negotiations have been going on for years with no meaningful progress. That’s a very good example of where the relationship needs to be enhanced and given the attention that it deserves, considering the bloc is one of our largest trading partners.

Not enough attention was paid by the Conservatives to the GCC as a priority trading partner, and I’m hopeful and quite confident that’s going to change under this government.

This is no longer a world where the UK and the US are the only partners available. Now you can just go over to China, Russia is making strategic alliances, and so on. It’s now a world where the UK needs to actually fight to be a partner and for opportunities. It isn’t that the region wants to turn its back on the UK, but one that commands respect. And if they don't have the right level of engagement, then naturally they will look elsewhere.

What’s important for us at Labour Middle East Council is to have the region viewed through the lens of how interconnected our foreign policy is. So, when we look at the issue with the Houthis and their attacks, for example, how has that impacted global trade as a whole and our interests in other parts of the world?

Domestically, migration is a huge priority for the UK government, and we need to be engaged with the region that is the source of a lot of that migration, especially as climate change plays a bigger role and has a huge impact on many countries, such as Syria, Iraq and Libya.

BURCU OZCELIK, Senior Research Fellow (Middle East Security), RUSI

The Labour government has inherited status quo-altering challenges on multiple fronts in the Middle East. With the epicenter in Gaza, conflict vectors reach across Yemen and the Red Sea, Iraq, Syria, and notably with Lebanon-based Hezbollah, where the threat of an escalated war looms large.

While voting results show that Labour gained the trust of a sizeable portion of the British Jewish electorate, largely thanks to rejecting the Corbyn era’s polarizing policies to a more centrist approach, how Labour behaves both in its domestic response to voter expectations, and in its foreign-policy posture in the Middle East, will be scrutinized closely by Jewish and Muslim voters alike, who look to the new government to reduce the devastating human cost of the conflict.

Foreign Secretary David Lammy is set to emphasize the pledge enshrined in the Labour manifesto to recognize a Palestinian state as part of a peace process toward a two-state solution “with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.” The issue is the extent to which Britain will play a proactive role in being pro-peace above all.

With the electoral campaign now behind us, voters will look to see tangible evidence that policies will match promises. This requires foregrounding a human-rights based approach equally all those civilians impacted, continuing to call for the immediate release of Israeli hostages held since Oct. 7, 2023, by Hamas, alongside pressure for a ceasefire, and urgent humanitarian aid to Palestinians. Unresolved issues will demand urgent attention, such as reviewing future means of funding that will permit the Palestinian Authority to govern effectively, legal concerns around UK arms sales, and the ICC’s ruling on Israel.

The Gulf states are poised — with the appropriate diplomatic assurances — to contribute to a necessary regional effort to support the rehabilitation, reconstruction and rebuilding of Gaza. Despite lulls and lags in the relationship, Labour now has an opportunity to engage with Gulf states (and societies) to facilitate a regional and sustained response to support Gaza, reassure Israel, and work toward the objective of Palestinian statehood.

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right allies will seek to buy more time. Britain can apply pressure to bring an end to the humanitarian crisis and support mechanisms — with strong buy-in from the Arab states — to begin planning for the day after.

 


Despite law, US TikTok ban likely to remain on hold

Despite law, US TikTok ban likely to remain on hold
Updated 17 June 2025
Follow

Despite law, US TikTok ban likely to remain on hold

Despite law, US TikTok ban likely to remain on hold
  • Trump has repeatedly downplayed risks that TikTok is in danger, saying he remains confident of finding a buyer for the app’s US business

SAN FRANCISCO, United States: US President Donald Trump is widely expected to extend the Thursday deadline for TikTok to find a non-Chinese buyer or face a ban in the United States.
It would be the third time Trump put off enforcing a federal law requiring its sale or ban, which was to take effect the day before his January inauguration.
“I have a little warm spot in my heart for TikTok,” Trump said in an NBC News interview in early May.
“If it needs an extension, I would be willing to give it an extension.”
Trump said a group of purchasers is ready to pay TikTok owner ByteDance “a lot of money” for the video-clip-sharing sensation’s US operations.
Trump has repeatedly downplayed risks that TikTok is in danger, saying he remains confident of finding a buyer for the app’s US business.
The president is “just not motivated to do anything about TikTok,” said independent analyst Rob Enderle.
“Unless they get on his bad side, TikTok is probably going to be in pretty good shape.”
Trump had long supported a ban or divestment, but reversed his position and vowed to defend the platform after coming to believe it helped him win young voters’ support in the November election.
“Trump’s not really doing great on his election promises,” Enderle maintained.
“This could be one that he can actually deliver on.”
Motivated by national security fears and belief in Washington that TikTok is controlled by the Chinese government, the ban took effect on January 19, one day before Trump’s inauguration, with ByteDance having made no attempt to find a suitor.
TikTok “has become a symbol of the US-China tech rivalry; a flashpoint in the new Cold War for digital control,” said Shweta Singh, an assistant professor of information systems at Warwick Business School in Britain.
“National security, economic policy, and digital governance are colliding,” Singh added.
The Republican president announced an initial 75-day delay of the ban upon taking office.
A second extension pushed the deadline to June 19.
As of Monday, there was no word of a TikTok sale in the works.
Trump said in April that China would have agreed to a deal on the sale of TikTok if it were not for a dispute over tariffs imposed by Washington on Beijing.
ByteDance has confirmed talks with the US government, saying key matters needed to be resolved and that any deal would be “subject to approval under Chinese law.”
Possible solutions reportedly include seeing existing US investors in ByteDance roll over their stakes into a new independent global TikTok company.
Additional US investors, including Oracle and private equity firm Blackstone, would be brought on to reduce ByteDance’s share in the new TikTok.
Much of TikTok’s US activity is already housed on Oracle servers, and the company’s chairman, Larry Ellison, is a longtime Trump ally.
Uncertainty remains, particularly over what would happen to TikTok’s valuable algorithm.
“TikTok without its algorithm is like Harry Potter without his wand — it’s simply not as powerful,” said Forrester Principal Analyst Kelsey Chickering.
Meanwhile, it appears TikTok is continuing with business as usual.
TikTok on Monday introduced a new “Symphony” suite of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools for advertisers to turn words or photos into video snippets for the platform.
“With TikTok Symphony, we’re empowering a global community of marketers, brands, and creators to tell stories that resonate, scale, and drive impact on TikTok,” global head of creative and brand products Andy Yang said in a release.


Russia attacks Kyiv with waves of drones, missiles

Russia attacks Kyiv with waves of drones, missiles
Updated 17 June 2025
Follow

Russia attacks Kyiv with waves of drones, missiles

Russia attacks Kyiv with waves of drones, missiles
  • “More strikes by Russian drones on residential buildings in Kyiv,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, wrote on Telegram

Waves of Russian drones and missiles struck districts across the Ukrainian capital Kyiv early on Tuesday, damaging an apartment building, sparking fires and injuring up to 16 people, city officials said.
Reuters witnesses said drones swarmed over the capital and they heard what appeared to be missiles overhead. An air raid alert remained in effect more than seven hours after it had been proclaimed.
Other parts of the country also came under attack, including areas outside the capital and the southeastern city of Zaporizhzhia, where the regional governor reported at least four strikes.
Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko said on Telegram that most of the 16 injured were in Solomianskyi district, near the city center, where a drone damaged the top floor of an apartment building and other non-residential areas.
Tymur Tkachenko, head of Kyiv’s military administration, noted 12 strikes in five districts. Among the targets was a kindergarten in the city’s eastern edge.
“The capital is coming under a combined attack,” Tkachenko wrote. “The Russians are deploying missiles and strike drones. There are fires in different districts and emergency crews are at work.”
Waves of drones had attacked Solomianskyi district, he said. “This is a very difficult night,” he wrote, adding that there had been power cuts in some areas.
Both Ukraine and Russia have launched mass drone attacks in recent weeks as the two sides have held two sessions of direct talks on ending the more than three-year-old war. The talks have produced agreements on freeing prisoners of war and returning the bodies of fallen soldiers, but little more.
“More strikes by Russian drones on residential buildings in Kyiv,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, wrote on Telegram. “Russia is continuing its war on civilians.”
Klitschko reported that a 62-year-old US citizen had died in a dwelling opposite a site where medics were providing assistance. He gave no further details and it was not clear how the man had died.
In Moscow, Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said Russian air defense units had repelled an attack on the city by two Ukrainian drones. The city’s airports were briefly closed.


Trump to depart the G7 early as conflict between Israel and Iran shows signs of intensifying

Trump to depart the G7 early as conflict between Israel and Iran shows signs of intensifying
Updated 17 June 2025
Follow

Trump to depart the G7 early as conflict between Israel and Iran shows signs of intensifying

Trump to depart the G7 early as conflict between Israel and Iran shows signs of intensifying
  • Asked what it would take for the US to get involved in the conflict militarily, Trump said Monday morning, “I don’t want to talk about that”
  • The G7, which originated as a 1973 finance ministers’ meeting to address the oil crisis and evolved into a yearly summit meant to foster personal relationships among world leaders and address global problems

KANANASKIS, Alberta: President Donald Trump is abruptly leaving the Group of Seven summit, departing a day early Monday as the conflict between Israel and Iran intensifies and the US leader has declared that Tehran should be evacuated “immediately.”
World leaders had gathered in Canada with the specific goal of helping to defuse a series of global pressure points, only to be disrupted by a showdown over Iran’s nuclear program that could escalate in dangerous and uncontrollable ways. Israel launched an aerial bombardment campaign against Iran four days ago.
At the summit, Trump warned that Tehran needs to curb its nuclear program before it’s “too late.” He said Iranian leaders would “like to talk” but they had already had 60 days to reach an agreement on their nuclear ambitions and failed to do so before the Israeli aerial assault began. “They have to make a deal,” he said.
Asked what it would take for the US to get involved in the conflict militarily, Trump said Monday morning, “I don’t want to talk about that.”
But by Monday afternoon, Trump warned ominously on social media, “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!” Shortly after that, Trump decided to leave the summit and skip a series of Tuesday meetings that would address the ongoing war in Ukraine and global trade issues.
“Much was accomplished, but because of what’s going on in the Middle East, President Trump will be leaving tonight after dinner with Heads of State,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt posted on social media.
Crises abound
The sudden departure only heightened the drama of a world that seems on verge of several firestorms. Trump already has hit several dozen nations with severe tariffs that risk a global economic slowdown. There has been little progress on settling the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.
But in a deeper sense, Trump saw a better path in the United States taking solitary action, rather than in building a consensus with the other G7 nations of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz held an hourlong informal meeting soon after arriving at the summit late Sunday to discuss the widening conflict in the Mideast, Starmer’s office said.
And Merz told reporters that Germany was planning to draw up a final communique proposal on the Israel-Iran conflict that will stress that “Iran must under no circumstances be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons-capable material.”
The European leaders wanted to help de-escalate the situation, rather than enflame it in ways that could spread through the Middle East in unpredictable ways.
Trump, for his part, said Iran “is not winning this war. And they should talk and they should talk immediately before it’s too late.”
But by early Monday evening, as he planned to depart Kananaskis and the Canadian Rocky Mountains, Trump seemed willing to push back against his own supporters who believe the US should embrace a more isolationist approach to world affairs. It was a sign of the heightened military, political and economic stakes in a situation evolving faster than the summit could process.
“AMERICA FIRST means many GREAT things, including the fact that, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Trump posted on Truth Social, his social media platform.
It’s unclear how much Trump values the perspective of other members of the G7, a group he immediately criticized while meeting with Carney. The US president said it was a mistake to remove Russia from the summit’s membership in 2014 and doing so had destabilized the world. He also suggested he was open to adding China to the G7.
Trump also seemed to put a greater priority on addressing his grievances with other nations’ trade policies. He announced with Starmer that they had signed a trade framework Monday that was previously announced in May, with Trump saying that British trade was “very well protected’ because ”I like them, that’s why. That’s their ultimate protection.”
High tension
As the news media was escorted from the summit’s opening session, Carney could be heard as he turned to Trump and referenced how the US leader’s remarks about the Middle East, Russia and China had already drawn attention to the summit.
“Mr. President, I think you’ve answered a lot of questions already,” Carney said.
The German, UK, Japanese and Italian governments had each signaled a belief that a friendly relationship with Trump this year can help to keep any public drama at a minimum, after the US president in 2018 opposed a joint communique when the G7 summit was last held in Canada.
Going into the summit, there was no plan for a joint statement this year. The Trump administration appeared disinterested in building a shared consensus with fellow democracies if it views such a statement as contrary to its goals of new tariffs, more fossil fuel production and a Europe that is less dependent on the US military.
The G7, which originated as a 1973 finance ministers’ meeting to address the oil crisis and evolved into a yearly summit meant to foster personal relationships among world leaders and address global problems. It briefly expanded to the G8 with Russia as a member, only for Russia to be expelled in 2014 after annexing Crimea and taking a foothold in Ukraine that preceded its aggressive 2022 invasion of that nation.
Beyond Carney and Starmer, Trump had bilateral meetings or pull-aside conversations with Merz, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
He talked with Macron about “tariffs, the situation in the Near and Middle East, and the situation in Ukraine,” according to Macron spokesperson Jean-Noël Ladois.
On Tuesday, Trump had scheduled to meet with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Zelensky said one of the topics for discussion would be a “defense package” that Ukraine is ready to purchase from the US as part of the ongoing war with Russia, a package whose status might now be uncertain.
Tariff talk
The US president has imposed 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum as well as 25 percent tariffs on autos. Trump is also charging a 10 percent tax on imports from most countries, though he could raise rates on July 9, after the 90-day negotiating period set by him would expire.
The trade framework signed Monday with the United Kingdom included quotas to protect against some tariffs, but the 10 percent baseline would largely remain as the Trump administration is banking on tariff revenues to help cover the cost of its income tax cuts.
Canada and Mexico face separate tariffs of as much as 25 percent that Trump put into place under the auspices of stopping fentanyl smuggling, through some products are still protected under the 2020 US-Mexico-Canada Agreement signed during Trump’s first term.
Merz said of trade talks that “there will be no solution at this summit, but we could perhaps come closer to a solution in small steps.”
Carney’s office said after the Canadian premier met with Trump on trade that “the leaders agreed to pursue negotiations toward a deal within the coming 30 days.”

 


US official says Trump not signing G7 statement on Israel-Iran de-escalation

US official says Trump not signing G7 statement on Israel-Iran de-escalation
Updated 17 June 2025
Follow

US official says Trump not signing G7 statement on Israel-Iran de-escalation

US official says Trump not signing G7 statement on Israel-Iran de-escalation
  • Canadian and European diplomats said G7 attendees are continuing discussions on the conflict at the summit in Canada, which ends on Tuesday

CALGARY, Alberta: A US official said on Monday that President Donald Trump would not sign a draft statement from Group of Seven leaders calling for de-escalation of the Israel-Iran conflict.
The draft statement, seen by Reuters, also commits to safeguarding market stability, including energy markets, says Iran must never have a nuclear weapon, and that Israel has the right to defend itself.
Canadian and European diplomats said G7 attendees are continuing discussions on the conflict at the summit in Canada, which ends on Tuesday.

 


Anti-domestic violence groups are suing over the Trump administration’s grant requirements

Anti-domestic violence groups are suing over the Trump administration’s grant requirements
Updated 17 June 2025
Follow

Anti-domestic violence groups are suing over the Trump administration’s grant requirements

Anti-domestic violence groups are suing over the Trump administration’s grant requirements
  • The groups say the requirements, which Trump ushered in with executive orders, put them in “an impossible position”

Seventeen statewide anti-domestic and sexual violence coalitions are suing President Donald Trump’s administration over requirements in grant applications that they don’t promote “gender ideology” or run diversity, equity and inclusion programs or prioritize people in the country illegally.
The groups say the requirements, which Trump ushered in with executive orders, put them in “an impossible position.”
If they don’t apply for federal money allocated under the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, they might not be able to provide rape crisis centers, battered women’s shelters and other programs to support victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. But if the groups do apply, they said in the lawsuit, they would have to make statements they called “antithetical to their core values” — and take on legal risk.
In the lawsuit filed in US District Court in Rhode Island on Monday, the coalitions said that agreeing to the terms of grants could open them to federal investigations and enforcement actions as well as lawsuits from private parties.
The groups suing include some from Democratic-controlled states, such as the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, and in GOP-dominated ones, including the Idaho Coalition against Sexual and Domestic Violence.
The groups say the requirements are at odds with federal laws that require them not to discriminate on the basis of gender identity, to aid underserved racial and ethnic groups, and to emphasize immigrants with some programs and not to discriminate based on legal status.
The US Department of Justice, which is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, did not respond to a request for comment.
The suit is one of more than 200 filed since January to challenge President Donald Trump’s executive orders. There were similar claims in a suit over anti-DEI requirements in grants for groups that serve LGBTQ+ communities. A judge last week blocked the administration from enforcing those orders in context of those programs, for now.