Connect with us

America

The US contacted the Canada against the truckers

Published

on

In a rare moment in Canadian history, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau testified before the Emergencies Act for an independent public investigation. The reason for the investigation was whether the state of emergency powers exercised against the protests of the truckers who locked Ottawa in January and February of this year were legitimate.

Trudeau stood firm in the face of the investigation. Claiming that the use of extraordinary powers is “unavoidable”, the Canadian leader said it is not possible to negotiate with protesters. “They didn’t want their voices heard, they wanted obedience,” Trudeau said, noting the threat of violence and the inadequacy of the police.

The Canadian prime minister added that he was “absolutely serene and confident” in his choice to exercise exceptional powers. The State of Emergency Law, which took its current form in the 1980s, had never been used in this form before.

One of the convoy lawyers told Trudeau, “When did you and your government become so afraid of your own citizens?” The Canadian replied: “I am not and we are not.”

What was done to the truckers?

Truckers organized under the name of “Freedom Convoy” had locked up the capital Ottawa to protest the COVID-19 vaccine mandate and public restrictions.

The matter was that the vaccine exemption for truckers crossing the US border should end on both sides of the border and the requirement for vaccination to cross the border was introduced. Truckers were saying that the COVID-19 vaccine mandate should be dropped.

The protests, which began on 29th January, entered a new phase after the meeting between Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau on February 11th. Three days later, the Canadian government began implementing the Emergency Act.

The law gave the government the right to block meetings and send federal forces to help local police. Furthermore, the bank accounts of people “believed to be supporting the convoy” could be temporarily suspended. The government also exercised this authority.

The pressure from the US and banks has worked

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, a member of the cabinet who testified before the commission, argued that Canada has faced a “dangerous moment” during the protests. What Freeland meant was that the blockade of truckers closed the vital trade corridor with the United States.

Trudeau went further and told US President Joe Biden during the protests that he was trying to reassure him that Canada would “continue to be a reliable partner”.

Chrystia Freeland described the phone call Biden had with one of her economic advisers, Brian Deese, on February 10th, as a “defining” moment. Deese said that if the blockade does not end within 12 hours, all automotive factories in the northeast of the United States will be shut down.

On February 13th, the day before the implementation of Emergency Act, the meeting with Canada’s senior bank CEOs also confirmed US’ concerns.

The CEOs felt that the protests were putting Canada’s reputation at risk. A CEO said he spent a week in the US and that the protests made Canada seem like a “joke” to his neighbour. CEOs complained of the inadequacy of the laws in force and made recommendations to cut off financial support for the protest organizers.

In fact, an unnamed CEO wanted the government to act quickly by declaring protesters “terrorists”. Freeland also made an interesting suggestion, calling it “deplorable” when a foreign investor, whom one of the CEOs tried to convince, called Canada a “banana republic.” “Remind him of Brexit if the foreign investor is British, remind him of the Yellow Vests if he is French, remind him of how badly they are currently managing Russia if he is German.”

‘How many tanks are you asking for?’

As part of the commission’s investigation, obtaining messages among the ministers also revealed shocking remarks.

The phone messages between Public Security Minister Marco Mendicino and Justice Minister David Lametti are an example to this. “You need to get the police to act,” Lametti wrote to Mendicino on 2nd February 2022. And CAF if necessary, ”he said. Mendicino’s answer is nothing more than a “joke”: “How many tanks are you asking for?”

The pair then complained of the inadequacy and inability of the Ottawa police chief to maintain order. The messages suggest that the Justice Minister is considering implementing the Emergency Act only on 30th January 2022. “I was just being cautious,” Lametti says.

Intelligence chief’s advice to Trudeau

Another fact that emerged during the investigation is that David Vigneault, chief of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), was the one to have recommended the use of the Emergency Act to the Canadian government.

Testifying to the commission, Vigneault said the truckers’ protests did not pose a national security threat to the CSIS Act, but the Emergency Act was still necessary.

Shaping media narrative

On the other hand, it was revealed how the Canadian government wanted to determine the media narrative against truckers. Trudeau adviser Mary-Liz Power sends a message to Alexander Cohen, communications director at the Department of Public Safety, outlining a media strategy that the truckers’ protest will resemble those of 6th January 2021 in the United States.

In another text message with Cohen, Power says that global and other media outlets are working on some news. Indeed, Global News, one of Canada’s largest media outlets, cited the headline on 25th January 2022: “Extreme right-wing groups hope that trucker protests will be Canada’s ‘January 6th’.”

America

Wealthy Americans drive surge in New Zealand golden visa demand

Published

on

More than 700 wealthy foreign nationals have applied for New Zealand residency under the country’s “golden visa” programme over the past 14 months, compared with just 115 applications during the previous three years.

Applicants are required to invest at least NZ$5 million in local funds, companies or charitable organisations within three years.

A further 127 people have applied under a separate programme that requires an investment of NZ$10 million in passive assets such as bonds for five years.

The surge followed a relaxation of rules governing property purchases, investment requirements and the amount of time applicants must spend in the country to qualify.

According to the Financial Times (FT), the increase in applications for the right to live, work and study indefinitely in New Zealand has coincided with a period of geopolitical uncertainty that has made the country’s security and remote location increasingly attractive.

Dozens of countries around the world, from Portugal to the US, offer preferential immigration treatment in exchange for investment or, in some cases, cash payments.

Many have had mixed experiences with such schemes. Ireland, Malta and Australia have scrapped their programmes because of insufficient demand or concerns over abuse.

In New Zealand’s case, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon hopes the visas will attract more foreign investment and help reverse a “brain drain” that threatens the country’s economic growth.

Although tourists often fall in love with New Zealand and dream of moving there, many young New Zealanders leave in search of better economic opportunities.

According to Luxon, New Zealand start-ups have already begun benefiting from the policy.

“While everyone else around the world is tightening restrictions, we’ve opened the doors and our start-ups have benefited enormously from the capital flowing in, as well as from the knowledge and technical expertise these investors have brought,” he said.

Since the programme was comprehensively overhauled in April 2025, applicants from North America, Europe and Asia have committed a combined NZ$4.8 billion, through investments of either NZ$5 million or NZ$10 million each.

That figure is comparable to the NZ$14.8 billion in foreign investment recorded during the first quarter of this year.

Lachlan Nixon, co-founder of venture capital firm Motion Capital, said the programme had become “a badge of honour in Silicon Valley”.

Data show that 277 applications have come from Americans, with Californians showing particularly strong interest in obtaining New Zealand residency.

“A massive influx of capital is coming, but what really matters is the quality of the people now investing in the New Zealand economy,” Nixon said. He added that 40% of a recent NZ$27 million fundraising round for high-growth New Zealand companies came from 30 holders of “golden visas”.

According to Luxon, companies benefiting from the programme include critical minerals firm Zethos, which appointed European steel industry veteran Francesc Rubiralta to its board.

Nixon said other companies backed under the programme include seed oil protein producer Miruku and magnesium mining company Aspiring Materials.

In the mountain town of Queenstown, a preferred destination for many applicants, locals refer to billionaires such as Peter Thiel and Anthony Malkin, whose foundation owns New York’s Empire State Building, as “the secret residents on the hills”.

Most prefer to keep their wealth and presence private. Thiel’s citizenship was inadvertently revealed during a parliamentary debate, while Malkin’s presence became public after fireworks he set off on New Year’s Eve sparked grass fires.

According to Cotality, their arrival has made Queenstown New Zealand’s most expensive property market, with a median home price of NZ$1.8 million, double the national average.

Under the visa programme’s rules, participants may purchase only residential properties worth more than NZ$5 million, a provision designed to prevent their presence from distorting the broader housing market.

“There are a lot of billionaires here. They just wear gumboots,” one property adviser said.

However, doubts remain about the programme’s benefits. Sam Stubbs, chief executive of pension fund Simplicity, said people should make “genuine investments” in the country rather than seek special treatment in exchange for “a small amount of money” invested in a venture capital fund.

“Heaven comes at a price. It’s a price we all pay,” Stubbs said.

Some applicants have also voiced concerns. Courtney Andelman, who runs a venture capital fund in Santa Barbara with her husband Jim, successfully obtained a visa last year and now visits New Zealand regularly.

“There’s something magical in the air and the water. It’s an incredibly healthy place,” Andelman said.

However, she said she wanted to settle in a smaller South Island city such as Nelson, where her investments could have a greater impact, but found very few properties worth more than NZ$5 million.

She also complained that under New Zealand’s tax rules, if her family spends more than 183 days a year in the country, their worldwide income becomes subject to New Zealand taxation.

Andelman said she loved New Zealand but expressed concern and issued an implicit warning.

“How to make every dollar achieve its highest and best use is a question we constantly ask ourselves. If New Zealand doesn’t offer the best value, we’ll go somewhere else. Every one of those dollars is mobile.”

Continue Reading

America

Oil industry lobbies White House to avert potential Trump export ban

Published

on

Oil industry executives and White House officials are engaging in a new push to prevent any move by the administration to restrict US oil exports.

According to a report by Politico, industry representatives say these efforts extend to the White House Domestic Policy Council, the National Energy Dominance Council, the Department of Energy, and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.

Trump believes that oil prices could harm the Republicans’ chances of maintaining control of Congress in the November mid-term elections.

“Everyone from the industry and within the administration is working hand in hand to prevent this,” an energy industry executive said.

The individual added that White House officials had not formally raised the idea, “but everyone knows Trump will act like Trump again.”

The White House maintains that export restrictions are not on the agenda.

White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement: “While the President and the entire energy team are taking various measures to mitigate temporary disruptions in the energy market, the administration has been very clear: there is no plan to impose restrictions on oil and gas exports.”

White House representatives did not confirm whether industry lobbyists had approached specific agencies or officials to discuss the export issue. Department of Energy representatives did not respond to queries.

However, although administration officials have guaranteed since the early days of the Iranian war that an export ban was off the table, Trump’s directive to the Department of Justice in June to investigate oil companies on charges of price gouging put the sector on high alert.

Concerns within the industry mounted after Trump stated on Monday that oil giants Exxon Mobil and Chevron were making “too much money.”

Industry executives now fear Trump may try to make a move against them by restricting fuel export activities abroad, which have boomed since the start of the US-Israeli war against Iran.

Another industry official said the sector had reiterated its concerns regarding export controls to the White House “very recently.”

The Trump administration has already tried several different approaches to lower prices that enjoy broader support from the oil industry.

These include the release of millions of barrels of oil from the country’s strategic petroleum reserve and the temporary suspension of the Jones Act to make it easier for non-American vessels to transport oil and natural gas between US ports.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright, a former oil company CEO, and Vice President JD Vance have repeatedly opposed the idea of limiting or banning exports.

Wright stated in May that the administration had “definitely” ruled out the option of banning diesel exports.

Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, said he was “confident” Trump understood the need to maintain oil exports, recalling that early in the crisis, the president had encouraged other countries to buy American oil:

“The administration has repeatedly expressed that they are opposed to [export controls]. Therefore, I do not think there is any change in their stance at the moment. Frankly, it feels as though we have to clarify this issue every three weeks.”

In a note sent to clients on Tuesday, consultancy firm ClearView Energy stated that the moment for the White House to take a step toward limiting fuel exports “might be approaching.”

The firm noted that former President Joe Biden had considered imposing export restrictions ahead of the 2022 mid-term elections following a “long summer of high petrol prices” caused by the war in Ukraine.

US crude oil exports increased by approximately 30% compared with last year, reaching nearly 3.5 million barrels per day by the end of July.

Shipments of refined products such as diesel, petrol, and other types of oil rose by 20%, exceeding 8 million barrels per day.

Opponents of exports argue that sending these cargoes abroad leads to rising prices domestically.

However, the oil and gas industry contends that closing the door to exports would harm the domestic market and cause their production to decline.

“Export bans may seem politically attractive, but ultimately they will lead to the exact opposite of the intended effect,” said a refining industry lobbyist who noted they were in contact with the White House on the matter, arguing that cutting off American exports from international markets would mean “a decline in US production, supply shortages, further upward pressure on domestic prices, and even greater disruptions in the global market.”

Chet Thompson, president and CEO of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, stated that export controls would force US refiners to produce less petrol because they would lose commercial channels to ship other surplus fuels, such as diesel, produced during the process.

Continue Reading

America

US and Ukraine restore intelligence sharing to former levels

Published

on

Three US senators have reported that intelligence sharing between Washington and Kyiv has reached its former level. The White House declined to disclose details of the current intelligence relationship, emphasizing that President Donald Trump remains focused on ending the conflict.

American senators reported that intelligence sharing between the US and Ukraine has returned to its previous level.

According to a report by Politico, the senators offering this assessment include Democratic Senator Mark Warner, a long-standing advocate for increasing aid to Ukraine.

Commenting on the matter, Warner said: “I don’t want to get into details, but things have improved.” Republican senators John Cornyn and Roger Wicker stated that information sharing has accelerated during a period of “strategic importance”.

Democratic Senator Tim Kaine also noted that he has observed signs of a revival in information sharing between the US and Ukraine.

The White House did not disclose details regarding the current state of its intelligence-sharing relationship with Ukraine. However, in comments to Politico, it emphasized that US President Donald Trump is focused on contributing to the termination of the conflict.

A White House official told Politico: “The President and his team remain committed to playing a constructive role in ending the war between Russia and Ukraine and remain optimistic that we will ultimately reach a peace agreement.”

Last autumn, the Financial Times reported that Trump had issued instructions to prepare for sharing intelligence data that could assist Ukraine in conducting strikes deep inside Russian territory.

Russian authorities are demanding that Western nations cease providing military aid to Ukraine, emphasizing that such assistance will not prevent Moscow from achieving its military campaign objectives.

Last year, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs requested that the US side clarify information regarding the transfer of intelligence data to Ukraine.

According to statements from the Kremlin, Russia has long been aware that the US and NATO countries collect intelligence and transfer it to the Ukrainian military, noting that this is “not a new development”.

Nevertheless, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia will not tolerate attacks by the Armed Forces of Ukraine and will continue to respond forcefully.

In June, President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia is prepared to conduct negotiations with Ukraine on the basis of the agreements reached in Istanbul.

According to Putin, the parties must also take into account the agreements reached between Moscow and Washington in Anchorage, the situation on the front line, and the conditions for a settlement previously set out by Russia.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey