It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
‘A Slap in the Face’: Trump Moves to Gut Biden-Era Rules Reining In Meatpackers
“We need robust enforcement of antitrust and fair trade practice laws to finally protect producers from meatpackers’ fundamentally unfair and illegal practices,” said one campaigner. Workers process meat at a Triumph Foods plant in St. Joseph, Missouri in this
United States Department of Agriculture photo. (Photo by USDA)
A leading government accountability watchdog group on Monday ripped the Trump administration’s move to rescind Biden-era rules enacted to protect ranchers and farmers from abuse by meatpacking corporations and boost competition in the key industry.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced the reversal of three Biden administration rules under the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921. One of the rules prohibits meatpackers, swine contractors, and poultry companies from retaliating against producers for actions like joining associations, speaking with regulators, or seeking other buyers.
Another rule mandated improved transparency in poultry grower contracts. The third rule‚ which was set to take effect this month, would have limited how poultry companies use the tournament payment system.
USDA said it plans to start the revocation process with proposed rulemakings scheduled for later this month and October.
Farm groups and antitrust advocates argue the move removes protections against monopolistic, deceptive, and retaliatory practices by dominant meatpacking and poultry companies.
“For years, meat corporations have abused hardworking farmers and ranchers. Now, the Trump administration is proposing to undo long-overdue progress made to level the playing field,” Emily Miller, staff attorney at Food & Water Watch, said Monday in a statement. “This move is a slap in the face to all those who have long fought for fair treatment in livestock and poultry markets.”
The USDA’s move comes amid increased meat sector consolidation, which studies by Food & Water Watch, More Perfect Union, and others have found results in higher consumer prices and lower farmer profits.
Over the course of his two terms in office, Trump has boosted the meatpacking industry at the expense of worker rights, competition, and public health. His administration refused to issue binding rules requiring businesses to institute safety measures amid the Covid-19pandemic, and he invoked the Defense Production Act to classify meatpacking plants as critical infrastructure and force them to stay open even as the coronavirusravaged industry workers.
Trump has also supported corporate monopolization in meatpacking, and his administration has shut down a Department of Justice antitrust probe of alleged industry collusion. Just four meatpackers control approximately 80% of the market. Meanwhile, cattle producers who in 1980 received 63 cents for every dollar paid by consumers for beef were receiving just 37 cents four decades later.
“We need robust enforcement of antitrust and fair trade practice laws to finally protect producers from meatpackers’ fundamentally unfair and illegal practices,” Miller said on Monday. “These rollbacks will do the opposite. We won’t rest until USDA does its job by putting producers above corporations.”
Monday, July 06, 2026
Russia Is Losing Its War Against Ukraine – Analysis
Ukraine’s Strategic Neutralization Working — Ukraine has shifted to a smart, drone-heavy strategy focused on degrading Russian logistics, energy infrastructure, and command systems rather than large territorial offensives. This has allowed Ukraine to strike deep inside Russia and inflict disproportionate damage.
Russia Facing Multiple Crises — Russia is suffering heavy casualties (up to 1,500/day), recruitment desperation (using prisoners, migrants, disabled), collapsing refining capacity, fuel shortages, economic strain (defense spending at 40% of budget), declining public support, and growing elite/military blogger dissent.
Putin’s Regime in Increasing Trouble — Putin is increasingly isolated and detached, cancelling major public events out of fear. His options are limited: escalation risks domestic instability, while continuing the war leads to further degradation. Time is not on Russia’s side, and the convergence of military, economic, and political pressures is pushing toward a potential turning point.
Analysis
Russia is losing its war against Ukraine, and a decisive turning point is approaching. This conclusion draws on Russian military sources, internal documents, polling data, and frontline reporting to build a comprehensive picture of Vladimir Putin’s regime in crisis. The convergence of five mutually reinforcing dynamics—military defeat, economic and financial collapse, public discontent, dissent among Russian nationalists and military bloggers, and elite fears of a coup and assassinations—contribute to Russia losing its war against Ukraine.
Ukraine’s Strategic Plan
Rather than pursuing the kind of large-scale territorial offensive that failed in Summer 2023, Ukraine has adopted what former Defence Minister Andriy Zagorodnyuk calls “strategic neutralization.” The approach does not aim primarily at recapturing territory through direct military confrontation, but at systematically degrading Russia’s capacity and will to fight. Ukraine disrupts Russian logistics, destroys supply lines, and strikes high-value targets deep inside Russian territory. This strategy is underpinned by what Zagorodnyuk terms a “Revolution in Military Affairs”—Ukraine’s rapid and largely private-sector-driven innovation in drone technology, precision strikes, and battlefield coordination.
The results have been remarkable. By May 2026, Ukraine was for the first time launching more drones and missiles into Russia than Russia was firing into Ukraine. In the first half of 2026 alone, Ukraine struck approximately 800,000 Russian targets.
Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyy described the strategy as maintaining the initiative by exhausting Russia while building Ukrainian reserves, striking where Russia is weakest, and steadily liberating occupied territory. Ukraine established a Deep Strike Command Center in January 2026 to coordinate attacks, and medium-range drones have effectively replaced the U.S.-supplied HIMARS systems as the primary tool for striking Russian logistics and troop concentrations.
Ukraine will acquire ballistic missiles by autumn 2026—the hardest category of weapon to intercept—just as Russian air defences are approaching near-total degradation. Political, military and security HQs in Moscow and St. Petersburg will be high value targets for Ukrainian ballistic missiles.
Russian Military Degradation
Russia’s battlefield position has deteriorated sharply. Russia seized only 0.4 percent of Ukrainian territory in all of 2024, barely 0.2 percent more by mid-2025, and just 164 square kilometres in the first quarter of 2026—compared to 1,151 square kilometres in the same period the year before. Since Winter 2025–2026, Ukraine has liberated 400 square kilometres of occupied territory.
Meanwhile, Russian casualties are staggering: the Defence Ministry recorded 36,000 Russian casualties in March 2026 alone, with 90 percent caused by Ukrainian drones, exceeding Russia’s monthly volunteer recruitment figures. In April, Russia was losing approximately 1,500 soldiers per day.
Russia is increasingly filling these losses from the margins of Russian society – alcoholics, drug addicts, and men with severe physical disabilities. Video footage of these recruits waiting at deployment centres has circulated widely on Russian social media. Russia’s pre-war prisoner population of 465,000 has fallen to 282,000, with the remainder deterred by news of very high death rates. Migrants from Africa and Central Asia lured with false promises of employment are forcibly conscripted and sent to the front. Students are being pressured to enlist, and businesses are being levied for recruits. Russia’s recruitment plan for 2026—409,000 soldiers—is being fulfilled at only 60–75 percent.
The quality of the army reflects its composition. Russian soldiers are sent on “meat assaults” without body armour, artillery support, or adequate supplies. Officers steal from their soldiers’ bank accounts and demand bribes to avoid suicide missions. Blocking units composed of convicts shoot soldiers who retreat.
A Russian deserter described his officers’ culture as defined by “fear, corruption and indifference.” Desertion doubled in 2024–2025 to 70,000. Internal documents hacked by Ukraine’s foreign intelligence service show that Russia’s General Staff privately acknowledges the army cannot achieve Putin’s stated goal of occupying all of Ukraine. Russian security analyst Vasily Kashin has conceded that the goal of “liquidating the anti-Russian regime” in Ukraine is “fundamentally unattainable” and that Russia “lacks the capacity to sustainably control and manage” additional occupied territories.
Economic Crisis
Russia’s financial position is equally dire. Defence spending has reached 40 percent of the federal budget—a record $146.4 billion—and total defence outlays since 2022 are estimated at $522 billion. Russia’s economic reserves are nearly exhausted, according to the Minister of Economic Development.
In the first quarter of 2026, government revenues were $11.7 trillion against outlays of $17.6 trillion. Business profits fell 33 percent year-on-year. Nearly half of small businesses are operating at a loss. Large numbers of Russians are withdrawing savings at a 30-year record pace, with central bank officials floating the possibility of deposit confiscation.
Ukrainian drone strikes on energy infrastructure have compounded fiscal pressure. In May 2026, strikes rendered inoperable refineries in Kstovo, Ryazan, Taman, Yaroslavl, Perm, Kirishi, Samara, Primorsk, and Tuapse—among Russia’s most critical refining capacity. The Tuapse refinery, which handles 12 million tonnes annually, has been attacked repeatedly; 28 of its 47 storage tanks have been damaged or destroyed.
The resulting fuel shortages have sparked a regional state of emergency in Krasnodar Krai and contributed to a major fuel crisis in Crimea and Russian-occupied southeastern Ukraine. The fuel crisis has also spread to the rest of Russia, including Moscow, undermining public confidence in Putin and the government. Energy rich Russia is importing oil from Kazakhstan.
Oil export revenues have halved relative to the previous year despite higher global oil prices, as Ukrainian strikes and Western sanctions take simultaneous effect. Ukrainian strikes against Russian energy installations have prevented it from higher oil prices brought on by the US-Israeli war against Iran.
Public Discontent and Elite Fractures
Russia’s public mood has shifted. The Levada Centre reported in April 2026 that 64 percent of Russians believe it is time to negotiate an end to the war, with only 24 percent supporting continued military action. Nevertheless, many of these Russians continue to refuse to countenance returning occupied territory to Ukraine.
VTsIOM (Russian Public Opinion Research Center) found only 29.5 percent of Russians named Putin as a politician they trust. Meanwhile nearly two thirds of Russians expressed a negative view of developments in the country. State television—once the primary instrument of Kremlin propaganda and public mobilization—has seen its audience share as a news source fall from 60 percent to 47 percent since 2022.
Among Russian military bloggers and Russian nationalists, criticism is intensifying. Prominent blogger Ilya Remeslo has publicly called Putin “not a legitimate president” who “must resign and be brought to trial as a war criminal.” He predicts a “palace coup” or “revolution” producing “profound changes” in late 2026 or early 2027. These views are becoming increasingly typical for military bloggers and nationalists.
Russian elites are increasingly divided between those who favour ending the war and those who insist on pressing forward, with the hawks now “persuading, defending and fighting back” rather than dominating the debate—a significant reversal.
Putin Detached From Reality
Against this backdrop, Putin is increasingly portrayed—including by Russians—as detached from reality and politically vulnerable. His approval ratings are declining; VTsIOM has ceased publishing weekly figures since late April 2026. Putin is mockingly referred to as “grandpa in the bunker” in Russian discourse because he lives in bunkers and never uses mobile phones or the Internet.
Ukraine’s attacks on Moscow and St. Petersburg—including strikes timed to embarrass Putin at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in June 2026—have exposed the hollowness of his strongman image. Putin cancelled a public military parade on 9May 9 “Victory Day” for the first time since 2008, citing the risk of Ukrainian attacks. Parades on Russia Day and Navy Day have also been cancelled.
The structural weaknesses embedded in Russia’s corrupt, hyper-centralized system cannot be resolved by escalation or full mobilization, which would destroy the regime’s unwritten social contract with the Russian population.
Time is decisively not on Putin’s side, and the growing crisis is increasingly becoming a threat to his regime. This is reflected in Putin’s paranoia. Ukraine’s campaign of “strategic neutralization” has made Crimea into an isolated island and is turning Russia’s size, which had been an advantage in the past against foreign invasions, into a disadvantage as it is impossible to provide air defence for every oil and gas installation, each military factor and military and air bases.
Putin’s options are limited. Escalation, through mobilisation, would be highly unpopular and threaten political instability – without bringing benefits on the battlefield. Ukrainian Defence Minister Mykhaylo Fedorov said Ukrainian forces would respond by increasing their monthly kill rate from 35,000 to 50, 000. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is counting on Putin being forced to deescalate and return to the negotiating table without his hitherto maximalist demands.
Irrespective of what decision Putin makes, different crises are coming together that ae contributing to Russia losing its war against Ukraine.
About Dr. Taras Kuzio
Taras Kuzio is a professor of political science at the National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy. He is co-author of The Four Roots of Russia’s War Against Ukraine (Cambridge University Press, 2026); co-editor of Russia and Modern Fascism: New Perspectives on the Kremlin’s War Against Ukraine (Columbia University Press, 2025); Crimea: Where Russia’s War Started and Where Ukraine Will Win (Jamestown Foundation, 2024), and Russian Nationalism and the Russian-Ukrainian War (Routledge, 2022). He can be found on X/Twitter @TarasKuzio View all posts by Dr. Taras Kuzio →
Ukraine strikes oil infrastructure sites near Saint Petersburg, Zelenskyy says
It comes after Moscow launched a massive drone and missile barrage at Kyiv earlier this week, killing at least 30 people and hitting more than 20 sites across the city.
Ukrainian forces carried out strikes on oil infrastructure sites near the Russian city of Saint Petersburg on Friday evening, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced.
In a post on X, Zelenskyy said Ukraine hit "port oil infrastructure that generates revenue for Russia's war".
"There were also successful strikes on Kronstadt – an important military target. The distance from Ukraine's state border is more than 850 kilometers," he added.
Alexander Drozdenko, the governor of Russia's Leningrad Oblast, had earlier reported that "several dozen" Ukrainian drones had been intercepted over the region, with debris falling on the port of Vysotsk.
Russian forces launched their own attacks on Ukraine's Poltava region on Saturday morning, targeting Naftogaz Group gas production facilities, according to Sergii Koretskyi, the company's CEO.
"A fire broke out at the site and operations at the facility have been suspended," Koretskyi wrote on Facebook. "It is not yet possible to assess the extent of the damage".
Russian strikes also hit the city of Sumy, where three people, including a child, were killed, according to Ukraine's Emergency Service.
Authorities said 27 people were injured, including seven children. Emergency crews rescued five people from damaged buildings.
In the Odesa region, a Russian strike injured two people and set ablaze a warehouse used to store food products, authorities said.
In the Kherson region, Russian attacks struck the grounds of a poultry farm, sparking a large fire in one of the facility's production buildings, officials said.
It comes after Moscow launched a massive drone and missile barrage at Kyiv earlier this week, killing at least 30 people and hitting more than 20 sites across the capital.
Kyiv's mayor described the strike as Moscow's "most massive attack" on the city.
Ukraine's air force said the attack included 570 air attack assets, including four Zircon missiles, 24 Iskander ballistic missiles, and 496 Shahed-type drones.
Kyiv has been repeatedly targeting Russia's energy industry in recent months as it looks to ramp up pressure on President Vladimir Putin and the Russian economy.
The attacks have sparked a fuel crisis across the country as well as in Russian-occupied areas, with limited petrol supply.
Ukraine denies claims of Kostyantynivka capture
Also on Saturday, Kyiv's army spokesman Andriy Kovalyov dismissed Russian claims the eastern stronghold of Kostyantynivka had been seized, saying the situation was "difficult" but that troops were defending the town.
Zelenskyy called the Russian claim a "lie", a day after Russia's President Vladimir Putin appeared in military uniform on television thanking his forces for seizing the town.
"Ukrainian defenders continue to hold their positions along the designated defensive lines. The situation remains difficult but is under the control of the Ukrainian Defense Forces," Kovalyov said.
He acknowledged that Russian troops have tried to seize the town and had infiltrated it in small groups.
"There have been instances of small infantry groups (1–3 personnel) infiltrating deep into the battle formations of Ukrainian forces. Counter-sabotage operations by the Defense Forces are ongoing in the town. Occupying forces are being detected and eliminated," Kovalyov added.
He said Russian carried out "11 assault attempts" on Friday but said they "failed to achieve any success".
"The enemy has resorted to the dissemination of blatant disinformation and fake claims by its highest-ranking officials," he said.
Friday, July 03, 2026
Mexico and Canada look for new solutions as US officials decline USMCA renewal
President Donald Trump championed the USMCA during his first term, but has now thrown the accord into question citing trade imbalances between the US and its North American neighbours.
As trade officials from the United States declined to renew the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), officials from Canada and Mexico are poised to react as the deal, worth nearly $2 trillion a year, sees an uncertain future, El Financiero reported.
The two US neighbours have previously signalled they want the agreement largely preserved, but President Donald Trump, who championed the accord during his first term, appears ready to use the review as leverage.
"There is only a small chance" Trump will actually invoke the exit clause, given the toll it would take on US trade and investment, particularly in Midwestern swing states, Oxford Economics said in a report published on June 30. The firm added it no longer anticipates a broad rollback of tariffs, forecasting instead possible "limited agreements to reduce sectoral tariffs". Mexico "appears to be the most exposed country, but its exports have held up", the report said, while Canada is attempting to diversify its export markets, a process that will take time.
Roughly 80% of Mexican exports go to the US, and Mexico City has said its priority is securing preferential tariff treatment relative to other trading partners, or avoiding tariffs entirely. Two rounds of bilateral talks between Mexico and the US have already taken place, with a third round set for late July.
About 70% of Canadian goods exports, including millions of barrels of oil daily, are shipped to the US. Talks between Ottawa and Washington over tariff relief advanced substantially last October before Trump broke them off after Ontario ran a US television advertisement featuring former President Ronald Reagan criticising tariffs.
Some Canadian provincial liquor boards barred sales of American alcohol last year in response to Trump's tariffs, restrictions Washington wants lifted.
The White House has also raised concerns over the Mexican government's favouritism towards state oil company Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex), curbs on private-sector participation in the energy industry, and the enforcement of labour laws in Mexico.
In the automotive sector, the US is pushing to tighten rules of origin to block the indirect use of manufacturing components sourced from outside North America, particularly China, seeking to raise the required share of US-made content in vehicles.
While the USMCA allows most food products to move duty-free, dairy remains an exception between the US and Canada. Ottawa caps the volume of American milk, eggs and poultry that can enter duty-free, while Washington maintains its own protections against Canadian dairy imports. The Canadian system has long drawn complaints from US farmers and lawmakers, and criticism from Trump, though it remains shielded by the political weight of Quebec's dairy sector.
Former Canadian and Mexican diplomats voiced cautious optimism that a new agreement would eventually emerge, according to comments made during a discussion with David Westin on Bloomberg's Wall Street Week programme.
Instead of renewing the deal on July 1, the Trump administration announced it will begin a decade of negotiations on amendments to it.
For now, the USMCA continues to shield most Mexican and Canadian goods from the broad import tariffs Trump has imposed on nearly all other US trading partners.
US refuses to extend North America trade pact in current form
The United States says it is not renewing the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement in its current form for 16 years, noting more talks are needed – Copyright AFP/File Guillermo Arias
The United States will not renew a North American trade pact with Canada and Mexico in its current state, the US trade envoy said Wednesday, meaning the deal will now be reviewed annually.
The move is likely to fuel uncertainty for businesses in North America, given deep integration across supply chains in sectors like automobiles.
But the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) remains in force for another 10 years even if not renewed by Wednesday’s deadline.
The free trade pact will instead be subject to annual reviews, unless a country decides to withdraw entirely.
“The United States did not agree to renew the USMCA in its current form. As a result, the USMCA is not renewed,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement.
“The United States will continue to engage with Mexico and Canada to address the agreement’s shortcomings and our trade deficits with these countries,” he added.
A senior US official told reporters Wednesday that US trade gaps were a key concern, alongside market access opportunities in Canada and Mexico. The official flagged tensions in areas like dairy and corn.
Mexico’s economy secretary, Marcelo Ebrard, confirmed the impasse.
On Wednesday, the USTR held a virtual meeting with Ebrard and Ottawa’s minister in charge of Canada-US trade, Dominic LeBlanc.
The Trump administration’s decision not to extend the pact was widely expected.
President Donald Trump said in June that he was not “looking to renew” the agreement despite signing and praising it in his first term.
Canada and Mexico had both called for a 16-year renewal of the USMCA.
With the deal being subject to rolling negotiations instead of a longer term extension, talks could last for months or years over everything from tariffs to trade rules governing specific sectors.
– Ticking clock –
Despite a 10-year countdown to the deal’s expiration, the senior US official said countries need not wait a decade to conclude their agreement.
“I think we need to come to a conclusion quickly, if possible,” the official added.
Analysts say the development does not change day-to-day trade between the countries for now.
But Scott Lincicome of the libertarian Cato Institute told AFP that uncertainty could dampen business investment.
Still, he expects the USMCA to survive, with goods and services trade within North America amounting to nearly $2 trillion in 2024.
Even as Trump unleashed tariffs on virtually all trading partners in his second presidency, he made critical exemptions for USMCA products.
American Automotive Policy Council president Matt Blunt stressed Wednesday that “North American economic integration enables enormous competitive benefits for the region.”
But Brian Bryant of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers union said the USMCA “should not simply be extended as-is.”
He urged for tougher labor standards and “meaningful measures that discourage corporations from moving jobs out of the United States and Canada in pursuit of cheaper labor.”
The United States and Mexico have held two rounds of bilateral trade talks and are due to hold a third in the week of July 20.
Mexico has been seeking to reduce US tariffs on steel, aluminum and autos after Trump slapped sharp duties on steel, aluminum and copper imports.
While Greer did not unveil a schedule for formal talks with Canada, he has met with LeBlanc.
The USMCA was implemented in 2020, replacing NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement that took effect in 1994.
It helped lower or remove tariffs and other trade barriers on many products traded between the three nations.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum after the draw for the 2026 soccer World Cup at the Kennedy Center in Washington, Friday, Dec. 5, 2025. (Mandel Ngan/Pool Photo via AP)
OTTAWA — As expected, U.S. officials announced on Wednesday’s much-anticipated deadline that they’re opting against rubberstamping the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement.
In a statement following a meeting of representatives from all three countries, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer pointed to what he called the deal’s “shortcomings,” and wrote: “The United States did not agree to renew (CUSMA) in its current form.”
So, what happens next?
Annual review process kicks in
In short, not much is changing from the perspective of the average Canadian.
Canada and the U.S. remain in a trade war that’s nearing the 18-month mark, after U.S. President Donald Trump imposed sweeping tariffs on Canadian imports last February.
While the vast majority of Canadian goods are exempt from the levies because they’re covered under CUSMA — with Canadian officials repeatedly stating Canada has “the best trade deal” in the world — a slate of sectoral tariffs remain in place.
Those are having significant impacts on the steel, aluminum, auto and lumber industries.
Wednesday’s CUSMA deadline, meanwhile, was baked into the original agreement, inked during Trump’s first term.
By July 1, officials in all three countries had to say whether they wanted to renew CUSMA for a 16-year period. Because the U.S. chose not to do so, an annual review process kicks in for the next decade.
That means weeks and likely months of negotiations ahead, led by Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Canada’s chief negotiator Janice Charette.
Officials from the U.S. and Mexico already have a date set for official bilateral talks later this month, with representatives from the two countries having already met before. Canada, however, has not launched official negotiations with the United States.
Speaking to reporters on Parliament Hill last month, Prime Minister Mark Carney downplayed the significance of that, saying there’s a “series of … technical issues” the U.S. has with Mexico, which explains their more extensive bilateral discussions ahead of the July 1 deadline.
“But for us, there’s the more fundamental structural issues, as people know, which relate to the so-called strategic sectors, that’s the American term, the 232 tariffs that are on automobiles, on steel, aluminum, forest products, particularly,” Carney also said at the time. “We’re looking to determine whether there’s a possibility of a new partnership there.”
Any of the three countries are also able to pull out of the deal entirely with six months’ notice.
Despite Trump’s previous comments that he would prefer CUSMA not exist at all, saying he thinks the United States is better off without it, neither he nor his deputies have given any indication that they want to terminate it.
U.S. published list of irritants
Apart from the specific CUSMA process, U.S. officials release a list of trade irritants annually.
In April, Greer’s office released its longlist, with several pages specifically relating to Canada, and pointing to liquor, supply management, Buy Canadian procurement policies, and the Online Streaming Act, among others as sticking points.
In the weeks leading up to the July 1 deadline, Trump himself had also signalled the U.S. would not be renewing the trilateral trade deal.
Following the G7 Leaders’ Summit in France last month, Trump said he would rather leave CUSMA unsigned and have it immediately terminated, though he also said he may sign the deal.
Trump has also previously stated that the U.S. doesn’t need anything Canada has, and that “Canada lives because of the United States.”
In a broadcast exclusive interview with CTV Question Period last week, U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra was pressed on Trump’s rhetoric.
“There were only two countries that responded in a strongly negative way,” Hoekstra said about Trump’s trade policy and tariffs. “The rest of the world, we’ve negotiated trade agreements. We’ve worked on frameworks, and those types of things. We did not take aim at Canada.”
More recently, Hoekstra has framed Trump’s remarks as a sign the U.S. is open to offers and has urged Canada to highlight its strengths in autos, energy, and resources.
Canada prioritizing sectoral tariffs
At various speaking engagements and reporter scrums in recent weeks, Canadian officials have repeatedly downplayed the July 1 CUSMA deadline, assuring that it’s “not a cliff.”
In a letter to his American and Mexican counterparts last month, LeBlanc stated Canada wanted to see CUSMA renewed for 16 years. In the letter, LeBlanc also laid out Canada’s priorities going forward, namely eliminating sectoral tariffs.
“Canada recognizes that either or both other parties to the agreement may wish to propose areas where improvements may be warranted to strengthen North American competitiveness,” LeBlanc wrote in his letter to Greer and Mexico’s Secretary of Economy Marcelo Ebrard, adding Canada “looks forward to continued engagement” with the U.S. and Mexico.
“In parallel, discussions with the United States on addressing sectoral tariffs will be essential,” he also wrote.
The United States has declined to extend CUSMA in its current form, triggering a new round of negotiations over North America’s trade framework. Although the agreement remains in force until 2036, businesses now face renewed uncertainty as Canada, the U.S. and Mexico prepare for what could be a lengthy negotiating process.
BNN Bloomberg spoke with Tom Mulcair, former leader of the New Democratic Party and CTV News political commentator, about why uncertainty may weigh on business investment, how tariff negotiations could evolve, and the political factors that could shape the outcome of talks.
Key Takeaways
Uncertainty surrounding future trade rules could delay major business investment decisions across North America.
Canada is expected to continue pushing for the removal or reduction of tariffs on steel, aluminum, automobiles and softwood lumber during negotiations.
Midterm elections in the United States could influence the political environment and negotiating leverage in future CUSMA talks.
Donald Trump is expected to use the possibility of withdrawing from CUSMA as a negotiating tactic, even if an actual withdrawal remains unlikely.
Any revised agreement is likely to resemble the current CUSMA framework because of the deep economic integration between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.
Tom Mulcair, former leader of the New Democratic Party
Read the full transcript below:
LINDSAY: The Trump administration has officially declined to extend the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement in its current form, triggering what could be lengthy and challenging negotiations over the future of the North American trade deal. While CUSMA remains in place until 2036, the decision introduces new uncertainty for businesses, investors and policymakers. Joining us now is former leader of the federal NDP and CTV News political commentator Tom Mulcair. It’s great to have you join us.
TOM: Good to be with you, Lindsay.
LINDSAY: So, obviously, this was widely expected, this decision, but how significant is it really today, both politically and economically?
TOM: I think you hit the nail right on the head when you talked about uncertainty because, even though we have a consolation in the fact that the deal continues in force for up to 10 years unless someone gives the six-month notice to withdraw — and we’ll talk about that at the end — it is the uncertainty that this creates. Businesses don’t make decisions, especially big ones, on an annual basis; they make them long term. If you’re not sure whether this deal, or another one, is going to be in place, you’re going to hold off. And it’s not just Canadian companies that are going to be affected by that; American companies and, of course, Mexican companies as well. So, that uncertainty in the market, that instability, is characteristic of Donald Trump. He doesn’t care about creating chaos. Chaos is his middle name. He likes this stuff. He had already said, in one sentence, as he left the G7 that he doesn’t care about the CUSMA deal. He wouldn’t mind leaving it on the table and just walking away from it, but then again, he could sign it all in one sentence. So, it’s the type of thing we’ve become used to with Trump, but it doesn’t make it any easier in a business environment.
LINDSAY: Yeah, and obviously Canada has repeatedly said its priority is eliminating tariffs on steel, aluminum, autos and softwood lumber, those sectors that have been hit so hard over the last year. I’ve heard some people say that we might just have to get used to having tariffs on those sectors. How realistic is it for Canada to be able to ease some of the strain on those areas?
TOM: I think that, long term, we’re going to see a lot of those lifted, or at least attenuated, because we have been, frankly, holding our fire. Donald Trump’s main recrimination from Day 1 was, “Oh my gosh, I looked at the numbers. There’s a trade deficit for the United States with Canada. We should have a trade surplus.” Well, guess what? That trade deficit was because we practically give him, certainly below market value, $100 billion of oil per year, and all of the refining and the value-added jobs are in the States, not in Canada. So, it would be very easy for Mark Carney to say, “You want to solve that issue, that trade deficit? We can solve it overnight.” But there is no reason to go down that road. That would be the Trumpian approach. Everything is a negotiation. Everything is a tit for tat. We’re trying to get a deal that makes sense for Canada, and Carney is right. No deal is certainly better than a bad deal. Trump would try to negotiate his way toward a bad deal for us. He has already threatened to really hurt the Canadian economy, as has Howard Lutnick, especially with the auto sector. So, we’re dealing with something unpredictable. We could have never guessed that Trump would go so far as to openly talk about absorbing Canada as the 51st state and intentionally harming our economy, but that’s what he’s been doing.
The information today that was just discussed on BNN Bloomberg about the United States economy, the softness of the job sector and the economy itself, is an indication that everybody loses. This is what Ronald Reagan said in the famous video that was played by Doug Ford in the U.S. during the baseball playoffs. Everybody loses when you play this tariff game long term. Trump saw the tariffs as a gentle rain from heaven pouring billions into the U.S. Treasury, but it’s not foreign countries paying those tariffs; it’s American consumers. That is finally starting to hit home. The American economy is being hit hard by those tariffs, by Trump’s approach. Even though it’s taken a while, I think the average American has come to understand it and might push back a little bit on Trump and make him open his eyes to the fact that open markets, especially in North America, have been a good thing for the U.S. and, of course, for its primary partners, Canada and Mexico.
LINDSAY: And I wonder, too, as you say, if U.S. voters start to notice this, the impact on the U.S. economy, particularly with the midterm elections coming up, could that be something that might help Canada when it comes to negotiations, maybe a bit of leverage there?
TOM: That’s the hinge. That’s the turning point, the midterms. Everybody’s got their own guess as to how they’re going to turn out, and the situation could change radically, for example, with Iran. But if things stay on an even keel, we can expect to see Trump really get hammered in the midterms, probably lose both majorities, and that would, of course, change the political landscape completely. Once we get past those, we’re into the home stretch of Trump’s four-year mandate as soon as we start 2027. So, I think that’s the reasoning behind this.
Carney is deeply experienced. He’s dealt with bullies before. He’s dealt with blowhards before. I just mentioned Howard Lutnick. He and Trump are just New York loudmouths, always trying to push their way through, trying to bully their way through. Reality catches up, even with bullies. At some point, the average Canadian has already realized we’re going to get a deal eventually. The Americans are not walking away from CUSMA. There’s too much interest in it for them. They’re not walking away from Canadian resources, whether it’s oil or potash that goes into every acre of every farm in the United States to produce the food Americans eat. These are things Canada has that America needs, even if Donald Trump says he doesn’t need anything that we have.
LINDSAY: Which he continuously seems to be saying. I did want to touch on something you mentioned at the beginning, which is the six-month notice to withdraw. Do you think that any party here will be exercising that, particularly the United States? Because, as you say, the U.S. is not going to walk away from Canada.
TOM: I think that will be a play by Donald Trump as this thing goes on for a few months. He’ll use that threat. It’ll be an idle threat. It’ll be an empty threat, but it’s something that we’re going to have to take seriously because, if he ever did do it, of course it would hurt the Americans as much as us because, as we just explained, they’ve been winners under CUSMA, as everybody else has.
But if he does actually withdraw, so people understand, the current deal continues for 10 years. It has to be reviewed annually, but it continues. It’s the same deal. Any of the three parties can simply give six months’ notice to the other parties, and then they’re out of the deal. So, I’m absolutely expecting Trump to try to play that card at some point along the way to try to put pressure on everyone. For him, everything’s a negotiation. Everything is bartering. Everything is trying to gain an advantage over the people you’re discussing things with. So, sure, “The Art of the Deal,” per Trump, will probably involve that six months’ notice. But again, it’ll be chaotic for the markets, for businesses. Trump’s middle name is chaos. He’s going to try to convince everybody that he’s been a big successful winner, no matter what the result is, even if it’s the same deal.
Lindsay, Trump said CUSMA was the best deal ever. He’s the one who signed it. Now he’s saying it’s a lousy deal. He brought in CUSMA because he said that NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, the precursor, was the worst deal ever in history. If you look at NAFTA and you look at CUSMA, guess what? They’re very, very similar, and in many respects identical. So, this is the pure Trump game. He wants to be able to boast that he got something out of it. We’ll see whether that actually comes to pass.
LINDSAY: And just lastly, I know you’re not an analyst or an adviser, but what do you think Canadian businesses and investors should be watching for in the coming months, just in the last 30 seconds or so?
TOM: Well, the first part is what we looked at at the beginning. I think that a lot of those businesses are going to hold big decisions. They’re just going to put themselves in a holding pattern, and they’re going to say, “We’re not going to make that massive investment south of the border, or going the other way, because there’s too much uncertainty.” So, I think that’s one of the things that we’re are going to be seeing the most, a waiting period as people try to decide whether there’s going to be a new deal.
I actually do believe that cooler heads will prevail, that there will be a good deal that will resemble a heck of a lot of CUSMA, which resembled a heck of a lot of NAFTA. But Trump, of course, has never been satisfied with anything that anybody else did. He gets to criticize that and says that he’s going to come up with something much better. We’ll see. We will see, indeed.
LINDSAY: Okay, we’ll have to leave it there. Former leader of the federal NDP and CTV News political commentator Tom Mulcair joining us live. Tom, thanks so much. Appreciate your time.
TOM: All the best, Lindsay.
---
This BNN Bloomberg summary and transcript of the July 2, 2026 interview with Tom Mulcair are published with the assistance of AI. Original research, interview questions and added context was created by BNN Bloomberg journalists. An editor also reviewed this material before it was published to ensure its accuracy and adherence with BNN Bloomberg editorial policies and standards.
U.S. declines CUSMA renewal, cites deal’s ‘shortcomings’
OTTAWA — The trilateral trade deal between Canada, the United States and Mexico, known as CUSMA, will enter an annual review process, as U.S. officials opt not to extend the agreement.
“The United States did not agree to renew (CUSMA) in its current form,” wrote U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in a statement to CTV News. “As a result, (CUSMA) is not renewed.”
“The United States will continue to engage with Mexico and Canada to address the agreement’s shortcomings and our trade deficits with these countries,” Greer added. “However, the agreement remains in force pending resolution of these issues or until the agreement’s termination.”
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. (AP Photo/Aurelien Morissard, Pool)
Representatives from all three countries met virtually on Wednesday to discuss the future of the agreement, after Prime Minister Mark Carney previously indicated he wasn’t anticipating any resolution, and U.S. President Donald Trump signalled he was unlikely to sign an extension.
Wednesday wasthe deadline for officials in all three countries to say whether they wantedto renew the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) for a 16-year period. Because the U.S. chose not to rubberstamp it, an annual review process kicks in for the next decade.
Representing Canada in the meeting were Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Canada’s chief negotiator Janice Charette. Both have tried to assuage concerns about Wednesday’s deadline by repeatedly assuring that it’s “not a cliff.”
In a statement after the meeting, LeBlanc said he reiterated Canada’s preference to have CUSMA renewed. Mexican officials have also said that’s what they wanted.
Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc makes his way to a meeting of the federal cabinet on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang
“We agreed on the importance of continuing our discussions and identifying ways to ensure trade and investment frameworks between Canada, the United States and Mexico continue to support North American prosperity and competitiveness,” LeBlanc wrote in the statement. “For Canada, this includes substantive discussions with the United States on addressing sectoral tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminum, autos and lumber.”
“We look forward to further engagement with the United States and Mexico in the coming weeks and months as we work together to strengthen our shared economic prosperity,” he also wrote.
Ebrard also said he’s set to meet with U.S. officials later this month for bilateral talks to address some of their trade irritants, and that Mexican officials hope to reach some agreement soon to reduce uncertainty for industry.
On Tuesday, Carney downplayed expectations for the meeting, telling reporters in Kuujjuaq, Que. that he was “expecting a constructive exchange,” but adding he “wouldn’t expect any drama,” and he was “not looking for (his) pen.”
Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly slammed the agreement, inked during his first term in the White House. Whether the U.S. administration planned to extend it, however, was unclear until Wednesday’s talks.
Following the G7 Leaders’ Summit in France earlier this month, Trump said he would rather leave CUSMA unsigned and have it immediately terminated, though he also signalled he may sign the deal.
Speaking at a digital event hosted by BMO earlier this week, Canada’s former chief CUSMA negotiator Steve Verheul said while there was “a possibility for it to come together,” he expects negotiations to continue beyond the U.S. midterm elections in the fall, and possibly into next year.
Steve Verheul, Canada's former chief trade negotiator. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chris Young
“We’re looking at a very different kind of discussion than we had in President Trump’s first term,” Verheul said. “At that point we were trying to negotiate 34 chapters of an agreement, and that was a very different kind of scenario than we’re looking at now.”
“Now we’re looking at pursuing a number of bilateral irritants that the U.S. is trying to reach some kind of accommodation on,” he added. “And there’s a handful of trilateral issues that are also under consideration, but most of, if not all of, the agreement is going to remain as it is now.”
In an interview with CTV News Channel on Wednesday, former senior White House trade adviser Kelly Ann Shaw called July 1 “a boring day when it comes to the trade agenda” because of the advanced indicators Trump would not vote to extend CUSMA.
Any of the three countries are also able to pull out of the deal entirely with six months’ notice. Despite Trump’s previous comments that he would prefer CUSMA not exist at all, saying he thinks the United States is better off without it, neither he nor his deputies have given any indication that they want to terminate it.
U.S. President Donald Trump talks to media after disembarking Air Force One. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)
Speaking during a fireside chat at the Hudson Institute — a Washington, D.C.-based think tank — in April, Greer compared certain provisions within CUSMA to “load-bearing pillars,” which currently function well within the agreement, and that the United States doesn’t want to change or get rid of.
“There are certainly things in there that are valuable, but we do have to have some kind of a protocol, or something with Mexico and one with Canada separately, I think, to deal with issues specific to those countries,” Greer said at the time.
Amid talks around the future of CUSMA, Canada and the U.S. remain in a trade war that’s nearly at the 18-month mark, after Trump imposed sweeping tariffs on Canadian imports last February. While the vast majority of Canadian goods are exempt from the levies because they’re covered under CUSMA, a slate of sectoral tariffs remain in place.
With files from CTV News’ Rachel Aiello and Abigail Bimman
Key U.S. complaints against Canada ahead of trade review
OTTAWA -- The U.S., Canada and Mexico are due to meet on July 1 to review a trilateral trade agreement after a period of heightened tensions between Washington and Ottawa.
The agreement, known as CUSMA, must be reviewed every six years under a deal made during U.S. President Donald Trump’s first term. Trump has been noncommittal on renewal.
As Trump threatens Canada by calling the country the 51st U.S. state, Canadians have cut back on travel and stopped buying American products. The opening of a new bridge connecting Windsor in Ontario to Detroit has been delayed.
Below are some of the issues the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office (USTR) highlighted in its 2026 National Trade Estimate report on Canada released earlier this year. A spokesperson for Canada’s minister in charge of U.S. trade declined to comment on these irritants.
Dairy and supply management
Washington has criticized Canada’s supply-managed dairy, poultry and egg sectors, saying production quotas and tariff-rate quotas limit access for U.S. exporters. Canada imposes tariffs that can exceed 200 per cent on imports above quota levels.
The U.S. has also complained about Canada’s administration of dairy import quotas created under CUSMA and raised concerns over milk pricing policies and market access for U.S. dairy products. Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government has said previously supply management will not be on the negotiating table.
Buy Canadian policies
The U.S. says Canada’s new Buy Canadian initiative gives preference to Canadian firms and domestically produced steel, aluminum and wood in major government contracts.
Washington has also objected to measures adopted by provinces including Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia that restrict or disadvantage U.S. suppliers in procurement competitions.
Wine, beer and spirits
Most Canadian provinces control alcohol distribution through government-run liquor boards, which the United States says impose barriers ranging from listing restrictions and pricing rules to distribution requirements.
The issue became even more contentious after several provinces stopped distributing U.S. alcohol products in response to Trump’s tariffs on goods from Canada from last year. Ontario Premier Doug Ford has refused to put U.S. liquor back on shelves unless tariffs are removed or a new trade deal is reached.
Digital services tax and streaming
The U.S. continues to monitor Canada’s digital services tax, which Ottawa pledged to repeal but had not formally eliminated by the end of 2025, the March report from USTR said.
Washington has also raised concerns about Canada’s Online News Act, which requires major digital platforms to compensate Canadian news organizations, and online streaming rules that require certain services to contribute to Canada’s broadcasting system.
Canada’s government has signaled it will back off plans to force entertainment companies such as Netflix to contribute to Canadian productions, saying it doesn’t want consumers to face higher costs.
Agriculture and seeds
The U.S. says Canada’s seed registration system is slow and cumbersome, limiting market access for some U.S. seed and grain exports.
Washington also continues to object to restrictions affecting imports of certain fresh fruits and vegetables.
Intellectual property
Canada remains on the U.S. Trade Representative’s Watch List for intellectual property protection.
The U.S. cites concerns about counterfeit and pirated goods, including sales at Toronto’s Pacific Mall, as well as issues related to patent protections and geographical indications.
Labour enforcement
While Canada has adopted measures intended to block imports produced with forced labour, Washington says enforcement remains insufficient and could allow such goods to enter the Canadian market.
Earlier this month, Canada introduced new legislation to strengthen the ban on importing goods produced with forced labour.
Alberta energy market
The U.S. says Alberta’s electricity market continues to disadvantage U.S. power producers.
Washington says stakeholders have complained that electricity generated in neighbouring Montana is given lower priority than equally priced power produced in Alberta, limiting access to the province’s energy market.
Pharma pricing
Washington says Canada’s Patented Medicine Prices Review Board unfairly depresses prices for innovative medicines by excluding the United States and Switzerland from the basket of countries it uses to benchmark patented drug prices.
U.S. industry argues the approach artificially reduces the value of innovative medicines in the Canadian market.
(Reporting by Promit Mukherjee; Ediitng by Caroline Stauffer and Sanjeev Miglani)
.jpg)
.jpg)
