Elerond

China exports to US because US buys stuff from the China. China's efforts to find new trade partners has hampered the fact that EU and co have also put tariffs for Chinese goods. But those markets that I mentioned are accessible and EU already is in in talks with them and alternatives for US trade should already exists more, but EU's US buddies segment has has slowed down the progress past decade, because they think that USA is our friend. you need functional supply chains - supply chains exits with the countries that I mentioned you need a trade agreement - there are existing trade agreements with the countries that I mentioned, but these trade agreements should be made better, comparable to one that EU has had with the USA. you need a country that can buy your goods and can absorb what the US buys - these countries need to only partially absorb the things that US buys, because big sunk of the goods that USA buys from Europe does not have alternatives and USA can't produce them itself, so regardless of how trade war goes USA companies needs to buy those goods from Europe or go out of the business. So even worst trade war can't really remove big sunk of the trade. All the things I mentioned were things that EU's commission itself offered as options, but they decided against them because many factors, from which majority has nothing to do with the trade. It is same factors why EU don't do anything to prevent Israel starving population of Gaza, even though it is something that EU by its own laws should be against.

EU needs to find new export markets because of this deal. For example 70% of Finnish exporting small business companies say that 15% tariffs will remove their ability to work in US market. Only companies that already have production in US say that they are able to continue the trade with the US. So getting 15% instead of 30% is next nothing. Avoiding trade war with US does mainly help the those businesses that don't have competition in US market, so they will not suffer from the tariffs. Other businesses needs to find new customers, because they can't live with profit margins that they get from US trade. Increasing trade with Mexico and Canada would help with exports. India, Brazil, Australia and Argentina would help also with exports, but it would also help with products where we EU has given import quota to US, to move that quota import quota to other countries. Putting tariffs for GOP states would force GOP politician in congress to do some thing or risk billions of dollars worth of trade in their states, as US companies could just continue with 0% tariff trade with EU by moving to democratic state, which would cause internal conflict in US that would make trade war more difficult to run. But anyway this was victory for European nationalist parties, as it showed that EU failed to protect EU's trade and it does not help to say it could have been worst when they failed to get single positive change in their negotiation.

they should have used their service tax weapon and put high tariffs for targeted products to kill exports from republican controlled states and lowers tariffs for democratic controlled states to cause internal turmoil in USA. Also offer zero tariffs for Mexico and Canada. Make deals with India and Brazil, decrease tariffs for Australian beef. Look deals with Argentina and Vietnam. Offer support for Taiwan, Korea and Japan. Offer massive investment funds for companies that build semiconductor and battery factories in EU. This would lead short term lost but long term independence and better competition on markets. Current deal offers short term stability but long term losses both in European manufacturing and global trade. But clearly EU's leadership is trying to give Trump political wins in order to avoid facing their past idiocies.

This was bad deal for EU and we will most likely see increase of support of Russia and China among politician and people, as deal does not have single positive change for EU it has only negative impacts compared to current state and it does not even guarantee long term agreement or that USA does not try to blackmail with withdrawing their military support or putting punitive tariffs. I am not sure that this deal will give even USA any clear benefits. Only positive thing that economist can say about deal is that it decreases instability on market, but even that is questionable as US and EU politician don't seem to agree are cars and medicines part of the deal. So at end day deal is bad faith deal and only reason it exists is that it is seen better than market instability, but it will create most likely create much more market chaos in coming years as it almost guarantees win for anti-eu, anti nato and pro russia/china parties in next elections, because it will increase unemployment rates, national debts, cause decrease in tax income. And it will work as example how EU can't even do the main thing why it exits. $600bn (£446bn), including American military equipment, and spend $750bn on energy - this is also empty claim as it does not have any legality, although EU countries were already planning to buy military equipment as part of their plan to increase defense spending and lack of European options. With energy question is very big question mark, as even though some EU countries are planning to buy US gas and oil to replace gas and oil that they have bought from Russia, $750bn is absurd sum, considering that USA capacity to sell LGN is ~4 billion square meters, which is about 1% of gas that EU uses in year. So USA should increase their LGN exports to 10x (current plan is to double export capacity to 2028) what is now and still it would take over 20 years to spent that $750bn (currently EU countries uses 310 billion euros year to buy oil and 90 billion euros to buy gas). this was 2.5% before April, so this is not win for EU carmakers in anyway. Estimated impact for them is massive loss, only compensated by fact that for some reason USA carmakers are currently suffering from higher tariffs, but this will anyway will case decrease of sales.

US car manufactures don't make their cars fully in US, where Japanese manufactures don't rely on imported parts usually and as Trump had great idea to put higher than 15% tariffs for countries where US manufactures buy their parts than. So end result is peculiar situation where US car manufactures suffer from higher tariffs than Japanese manufactures and when this is combined with fact that US manufactures need pay more their workers than Japanese manufactures, Trump has succeeded to increase price of US manufactured cars more than Japanese manufactured cars. US new car sellers are the ones that suffer most of these changes because they need to cut their profits in order to keep people by cars from them. EDIT: So these trade deal as things are now looks like one that will just increase US trade deficit with Japan and increase amount of taxes that US people pay for their cars.

He gets beaten up quite lot and wins only one fight

Senate increased it to be 5 trillion. One rule that always seems to be true is that when politician say that they are worried of national debt they always lie.

Current governance has already deported US citizens without any court procedures. So I would say he can do it, as no one will prevent it even if it is illegal

That is just farce. Awful decision all around as it will not increase European defense, countries already have plans for creative counting how to make it on paper look like they are "spending" 5% of their GDP in defense. We could for example take Finland as example, we currently spent bit over 6 billion euros in defense, after this increase we would spent 16 billion euros in defense each year. Finland's military uses bit less than 2 billion euros to run itself (this does not include cost caused by compulsory military service, which will be left out from the increased budget). Two largest military procurements in past decade are our navy buying two corvettes with 2 billion dollars, which were ordered in 2015, and first will be delivered in 2027, so that 2 billion dollars is divided over 15 years, so about 133 millions per year. The largest purchase in past decade has been 64 F-35 with 8 billion, with 10 year delivery window, so 800 million per year. With new budget Finland can run its military and repeat both of these purchase every year and have still 2 billion to spend other things. Which is quite absurd thing to do. Only way we could actually spent that much money is to start building up massive stock of cruise missiles. But most likely we will just write all public funding for defense contractors that are selling weapons to other countries as "defense spending". Also Trump may changes his mind about Nato next week if he feels like it.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-parliament-approves-bill-suspend-cooperation-with-un-nuclear-watchdog-2025-06-25/ Iran is kicking IAEA out from Iran and speeding up their "peaceful nuclear programme"

Iran has knowledge of how to make nukes. They have tried to make deals to trash their nuclear program several times and each time other countries have broken the deals. They have seen that non-attack and promises to protect deals are not hold by countries. And they were in process to negotiate of to end their nuclear program only to be attacked when main part of negotiation was meant to start. And they know from Russian example that nukes are reason why western countries avoid becoming parts of the conflict and avoid giving too much help to Ukraine. Israel's bombing campaign at most has delayed their nuke program for month or two, according to military experts. So why would they not continue and speed up their nuke program, when they know that with bombs only Israel and even US can't prevent them from producing nukes, considering that they already have everything they need to make them? And longer Israel is allowed to bomb Iran without sanctions more Iran will see that there is no benefits from the negotiations and that Israel and west are seeking of total destruction of Iran.

This campaign will most likely ensure that Iran will acquire nuclear weapon. Only full invasion and occupation of Iran will prevent that in this point.

US resigned from nuclear agreement and ensured that other countries can't either to remove sanctions as promised, which is why IAEA doesn't have full access. Also Israel has failed to hit Iran's more advanced nuclear lab Fordow and US official estimate is that Israel can't hit it without US help and without destroying it Israel isn't able to really effect Iran's capacity to produce weapon grade uranium and nuclear weapons.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/17/politics/israel-iran-nuclear-bomb-us-intelligence-years-away?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc "When Israel launched its series of strikes against Iran last week, it also issued a number of dire warnings about the country’s nuclear program, suggesting Iran was fast approaching a point of no return in its quest to obtain nuclear weapons and that the strikes were necessary to preempt that outcome. But US intelligence assessments had reached a different conclusion – not only was Iran not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon, it was also up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver one to a target of its choosing, according to four people familiar with the assessment."

There were news that Russia gifted 10 S-400 batteries to Iran. But it is difficulty to say if they were actually delivered and if they were where Iran deployed them. Also air defence systems also need missiles to work, S-400 with older missiles isn't any better to hit f-35 than s-300 variants.