First, the destruction of academic and scientific research in the United States continues. I just do not understand why they are so angry and what they think will happen now:
Journalists keep asking me, baffled, “What’s the Trump administration really trying to do to the science agencies?” So I say “They are trying to destroy them. Cut off their funding, ruin their facilities, harass their staff into leaving.” It’s not reform, and it never was. It’s destruction.
— Derek Lowe (@dereklowe.bsky.social) June 24, 2025 at 4:34 PM
[image or embed]
One thing to emphasize strongly is that funding to science is like oxygen to the brain. Temporarily restricting oxygen flow for ten minutes (while you figure your shit out) is going to have the same outcome as shutting oxygen off permanently. We are close to the ten minute mark.
— Harmit Malik (@harmitmalik.bsky.social) June 25, 2025 at 9:46 AM
[image or embed]
This administration's goal is to destroy US science and to do it quickly *40% cut for NIH funding * 50% cut in National Science Foundation funding * Virtual elimination of funding for climate and environmental research * Attacks on elite universities Science is so woke www.npr.org/2025/04/18/n...
— Laurie Loves Data (@laurelann.bsky.social) June 21, 2025 at 5:02 AM
[image or embed]
Meanwhile in Canada:View on Threads
View on Threads
Joseph Ataman and Clare Sebastian / CNN
So Trump went from this:
Next, I'm seeing praise for Carney's military support initiatives today:
Inside the NATO charm offensive that shocked as much as it delivered
...in The Hague, Rutte seemed ready to do anything to burnish the US president’s ego and save him face.
Trump’s decision to attack Iran’s nuclear program was “extremely impressive,” the NATO chief told Trump. “The signal it sends to the rest of the world that this president, when it comes to it, yes, he is a man of peace, but if necessary, he is willing to use strength.”
Time and again around the summit, Rutte’s interjections soothed Trump’s passage – softening his landing after a fiery “f**k” at Iran and Israel’s latest exchange of missiles lit up international headlines.
Rutte’s response: a jokey aside in front of the world’s cameras.
“Daddy has to sometimes use strong language,” he said beside Trump, after the US president used the analogy of two children fighting to describe the conflict between Iran and Israel.
Rutte later said he wasn’t referring to Trump as “daddy” but was merely using a metaphor.
The Dutchman didn’t spare praise for Trump’s strikes on Iran – a conflict technically outside the NATO wheelhouse – as the president railed against suggestions in a leaked government assessment that undercut his claim the strikes “obliterated” parts of Iran’s nuclear program.
“The secretary general knows that personal relationships go a long way with this administration,” Torrey Taussig, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and a former NATO policy adviser at the Pentagon, told CNN.
“I do think this is a kind of hold-your-nose moment. Ensure there are no fireworks in The Hague. Get a good photo op and go home,” she added.
Beyond Rutte, the whole summit was sculpted around Trump.
Slimmed down, the schedule featured a single session for leaders; experts have suggested this was for Trump, who earlier this month skipped the ending of the G7 summit, missing a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Of course, the summit result is largely pre-ordained, after rounds of pre-negotiations to ensure the leaders had to only rubber-stamp declarations.
Ukraine’s war with Russia – by far the most pressing issue on NATO’s agenda – was also excised from the summit’s final declaration, the first time it has been missing since Russian President Vladimir Putin’s full invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Even the crown jewel of the gathering, the promise to spend 5% of gross domestic product on defense (split into core defense requirements and 1.5% on defense-related spending by 2035), was a Trump-branded product.
...The summit was, by all accounts, a win for NATO: Members unanimously agreed to boost spendings to post-Cold War highs – and thanked Trump for it.
“In diplomacy, you try to get a goal and an aim, and what did we achieve here? We achieved an historic result, where NATO went back to its roots of collective defense,” Finland’s Stubb told CNN on the sidelines of the summit.
...While he stopped short of committing further US aid to Ukraine, Trump suggested Kyiv may see future Patriot missile system deliveries from the United States – and he slammed Putin as “misguided,” conceding the Russian leader may have territorial designs that extend further than Ukraine.
Finally, Trump’s own views on NATO – often a prickly subject for the famously transactional president – saw a reversal.
“These people really love their countries,” Trump said of the NATO leaders at his news conference concluding the NATO summit. “It’s not a rip-off, and we’re here to help them protect their country.”
“I came here because it was something I’m supposed to be doing,” he added, “but I left here a little bit different.”
So Trump went from this:
To this:Q: "Are you still committed to Article 5 of NATO?" Trump: "It depends on your definition. There are numerous definitions of Article 5. But I'm committed to being their friends."
— The Bulwark (@thebulwark.com) June 24, 2025 at 10:11 AM
[image or embed]
[Q]: Mr. President, you said you would clarify your stance on Article 5 just yesterday. Is that something you can explain today? President Trump: I stand with it. That's why I'm here. If I didn't stand with it, I wouldn't be here.
— Anton Gerashchenko (@antongerashchenko.bsky.social) June 25, 2025 at 7:06 AM
[image or embed]
View on Threads
Black Cloud Six: Unscripted
And international trade is reflecting Canada's new assertiveness already:
Moving on: Spotted at Value Village:
Finally, this:
Canada and NATO’s Defence Spending Challenge
Why NATO’s 5% Target Isn’t What It Seems—and What It Means for Canada
...largely in an effort to placate Trump (and to boost his massive ego even further), NATO has agreed to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP over the next ten years. This is a massive increase—one only seen during wartime—and is unsettling even to defence hawks like myself. It is a level that even the United States is nowhere near meeting (why the media isn’t addressing this is beyond me). But, like many things, the devil is in the details—and 5% really isn’t 5%.
NATO nations committed to an actual defence spending increase to 3.5% of GDP, to be achieved in the next decade. The remaining 1.5% is to be directed toward “defence-related” infrastructure, industry, and enabling capabilities—the nature of which is conveniently undefined. Spain sought an exception to this target, but the remaining members signed on—likely because 3.5% is much more achievable than 5%.
What does this mean for Canada? The press is already hyperventilating about an increase that would result in a defence budget of some $150 billion. This is certainly not the case. Instead, we’re looking at an increase from our current 2% to 3.5% by 2035, with a re-evaluation in 2029. This could be achieved by accelerating projects currently on the books—but with extremely long timelines. Indeed, I have previously argued that the timelines are far too long. Moreover, I strongly suspect that Ottawa will engage in some smoke and mirrors to reach the target; we’re already “re-orienting” the Canadian Coast Guard to include it in our overall defence spending. We can expect much more of this sort of thing.
For the rest? Prime Minister Carney addressed this yesterday (24 June) in an interview with CNN. “Defence infrastructure” can mean many things, including the development of critical mineral sources, improvements to ports, increased border security, dual-purpose industries, and many other things. We will also improve our cyber and information systems defences. It all counts toward the additional 1.5%. In my opinion, these are all things that should be done anyway—especially as they serve to further decrease our reliance on the United States.
The latter seems to be the government’s overall objective. Canada has signed an extremely comprehensive defence and security partnership with the European Union—one that will likely give us access to the EU’s SAFE programme of defence loans, funding, and industrial development initiatives. This is a critical shift, one that will essentially see Canada treated as a member of the EU for defence purposes. All of this funding and development will count toward NATO’s target.
Things are also moving to draw us even closer to the United Kingdom, with announcements made before the recent G7 summit about the reopening of the British base at Suffield, Alberta, increased bilateral intelligence sharing, deeper defence co-operation, and a focus on cyber and information systems. I strongly suspect that there is more that has not been mentioned in public. Indeed, there may be things happening with France that have not yet been announced as well.
I’ll freely admit that I am greatly relieved at the Government’s approach to strategic issues and international affairs. Ottawa does indeed go out of its way to avoid directly criticising Trump, fully realising that a wrong word could result in new tariffs, a change in security relations, or new talk of annexation. After all, like most authoritarians, Trump equates himself with the United States itself. But under the radar, things seem to be changing extremely rapidly and with the urgency that these articles have begged for—for months...
And international trade is reflecting Canada's new assertiveness already:
View on Threads
Now that California has shown the way, ICE is cruising for a bruising now across the United States. As Trump sends his ICE gestapo to other states, this type of thing is going to be happening all summer:
The Trump administration can't seem to keep their obsessions straight anymore:
View on Threads
View on Threads
4 comments:
Unless you're preparing for war, spending 5 percent of GDP on defense is insane. The last time we were at that level was during and shortly after the Korean War. No matter how much accounting jiggery pocket pokery the government does, even 3 percent will balloon the deficit and provide little benefit to Canadians. I can only conclude that NATO is preparing for war.
That actually may be the case, because Putin may not stop. That said, if they can molify Trump, I guess it's less likely Putin would attack. It's going to be a long time until the Midterms (if they happen at all)
"spending 5 percent of GDP on defense is insane" Yes
and
"NATO is preparing for war" Yes.
Afraid of tRump? Or simply not content with waiting for climate-change (or the other 16 existential-environmental crises) to end our misery?
My only hope is that Carney and his NATO colleagues are planning to keep icing the puck until the orange bloat is gone.
"Putin may not stop"
??
Right! If only Putin had forbidden NATO to place all those missiles on his borders.
And .... The Ukraine was such a cake walk, the rest of Europe will be his desert?
Post a Comment