Wildfires rage across parts of France, Spain and Italy

By Nathan Rennolds

Published on 23/07/2026 - EURONEWS

Two firefighters died in France, and another died in Italy while working to tackle wildfires that have devastated Europe this week.

Wildfires continued to spread across parts of France, Spain and Italy on Wednesday, forcing thousands of people from their homes amid soaring temperatures.

In southwestern France's Gironde department, more than 10,000 people were evacuated overnight due to a blaze that's ravaged more than 2,000 hectares in the region, local authorities said.

The fire broke out in the town of Saumos on Wednesday and has advanced southwest towards the areas of Le Porge and Lège Cap-Ferret.

As of Thursday morning, 500 firefighters are tackling the blaze, with aerial reinforcements on the way.

Two firefighters were killed while tackling flames in the Mérignac suburb of Bordeaux on Tuesday.

French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez met with their families and colleagues on Wednesday to pay tribute to the pair.

"On behalf of the president of the Republic, the government and the entire nation, which owes them so much, I expressed our boundless gratitude and our unwavering support," he wrote in a post on social media.

Multiple departments in southern France remain under a red alert for forest fires on Thursday, per Météo-France.

A firefighter sprays water on burnt vegetation and trees during clean up operations in an area affected by a wildfire in Cotignac, France, Wednesday July 22, 2026. AP photo

Italy

Fires have also broken out in Sicily, where around 6,000 emergency responders, including firefighters, forest guards and civil protection officers have been mobilised to assist.

According to the regional government, 300 of the island's 344 reported fires had been extinguished as of Wednesday.

"The most critical blazes, where teams from the fire brigade, civil protection and the forestry corps are currently in action, are in Casaboli, Bivona, Alimena, San Cataldo, Galati Mamertino, certain areas of the Madonie Park and the Syracuse area," it said in a press release.

One firefighter named by officials as Alessandro Marchi died while responding to a fire in San Cataldo, Italian Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi announced.

"He lost his life whilst carrying out his duty, in the service of the community. On behalf of myself and the Ministry of the Interior, I extend my deepest condolences to his family," Piantedosi said.

Spain

A major wildfire has also been declared to the southwest of the Spanish capital, Madrid, between the towns of Almorox and Villa del Prado.

Video footage posted to social media by Spain's Civil Guard showed officers going home to home as residents were evacuated from parts of the area.

As of Wednesday night, 88 firefighters, 35 vehicles, and a helicopter had been deployed to help fight the fire.

It comes after a devastating wildfire in Spain's Guadalajara province had already burnt through 32,000 hectares to the north of Madrid

According to data from the European Forest Fires Information System, wildfires have burnt around 254,388 hectares across the EU in 2026.

This is higher than the long-term average but remains below the 270,449 hectares that burnt in 2025 over the same period, per the data.

Climate change has intensified Europe's risk of drought, scientists say


Human-caused climate change has intensified Europe's drought by making extreme heat, rather than low rainfall, the main driver of exceptionally dry conditions, an international team of scientists said on Thursday, warning that a warmer atmosphere is sharply increasing drought and wildfire risks.


Issued on: 23/07/2026 
By:  FRANCE 24

Firefighters stand near the scene where two firefighters died while battling a building fire in Merignac in southwestern France on July 21, 2026. © Caroline Blumberg, AP

Human-caused climate change has intensified a drought across Europe, with extreme heat, rather than low rainfall, driving the exceptionally dry conditions, a team of international scientists said on Thursday.

The continent is gripped by a major drought, with countries from France to Romania confronting parched rivers, water restrictions and devastating wildfires after a historic heatwave in June.

A new study found that today's hotter climate has accelerated moisture loss from Europe's soils, lakes and rivers, increasing the likelihood of bone-dry conditions.

Much of Europe received below-average rainfall during spring, but it was climate-driven heat that made the drought "more severe", said Mariam Zachariah, who co-authored the World Weather Attribution group study.

Cover image: © France 24
01:56

"Overall, our results show that this drought is not primarily a story of low rainfalls but of a warmer atmosphere that is causing more moisture deficits on the land," Zachariah, from Imperial College London, told reporters.

"This means that even in regions where the rainfall has changed little or is projected to increase seasonally, drought risk continues to rise."

This is because a warmer atmosphere can hold about seven per cent more water vapour for every 1C rise in temperature, scientists say.

The planet has warmed about 1.4C since 1850–1900, primarily because of the burning of coal, oil and gas.

'Thirsty' atmosphere

Scientists say climate change is making destructive events such as droughts, floods and heatwaves more frequent and intense, and that Europe is the world's fastest-warming continent.

Last month was the hottest June ever recorded in western Europe, the Copernicus Climate Change Service said, with a brutal heatwave causing thousands of excess deaths.

The heat was such that even regions that experienced a relatively wet winter were baked dry just months later, study co-author Dominik Schumacher from ETH Zurich told journalists.

"If you have increasingly hot air, it will soak the soils dry. And then it gets even hotter, and the soils get even drier," he said. This rapid drying also primed the land for wildfires, he added.

Cover image: Un avion largue un produit ignifuge sur un feu de forêt entre Taradeau et Les Arcs-sur-Argens, près d'Arc-sur-Argens, dans le sud de la France, dimanche 19 juillet 2026. © Manon Cruz, Reuters
02:07

For the study, scientists from Europe, the United States and the United Kingdom used weather data and computer models to compare a drought in today's hotter world with a climate that was 1.4C cooler.

They found that extremely dry soils were five times more likely today in western Europe than in a world without climate change, and 11 times more likely in eastern Europe.

The exceptionally high levels of evaporative demand – the atmosphere's potential to draw moisture from soils and plants – observed between April and June in western Europe were about 80 times more likely.

"Because the atmosphere is now thirstier, the same rainfall deficit that might not have caused a drought in the pre-industrial climate can now lead to a more severe" event, said Zachariah.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

 

Prescribed burns saved thousands of giant sequoias

Iconic trees treated with prescribed fire four times more likely to survive extreme wildfires

University of California - Davis

Facebook

XLinkedIn
MessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

A forester sprays a giant sequoia during a controlled burn in 2009 in Kings Canyon National Park. About a decade later, extreme wildfires swept through the region, but sequoias previously treated with prescribed fire were four times more likely to survive, a UC Davis study found. 

view more 

Credit: Anthony Caprio/National Park Service

When two major wildfires burned through the Sierra Nevada in 2020 and 2021, they took thousands of giant sequoia trees with them. Without prescribed burns, thousands more would have died, according to a new study from the University of California, Davis. 

The study, published in the journal Nature Communications, found that giant sequoias treated with prescribed fire in the previous decade were nearly four times more likely to survive 2020’s Castle Fire and 2021’s KNP Complex Fire than untreated trees within the same groves.

“Prescribed burns are effective at reducing giant sequoia mortality, even for today’s extreme wildfires,” said lead author Dan Dixon, who was a UC Davis postdoctoral researcher in Professor Yufang Jin’s lab when the study was conducted. “If the goal is protecting giant sequoias, prescribed fire is an essential tool available to managers.”

About giant sequoias

As their name implies, giant sequoias are massive. Weighing as much as 15 blue whales, these towering, iconic trees can live for more than 3,000 years. They naturally occur exclusively along the western slopes of California’s Sierra Nevada. 

With thick bark and tall canopies, periodic low-intensity fire is a natural and essential part of what they need to thrive. But images of torched skeletons of the beloved trees during the late summers of 2020 and 2021 astonished many who considered them practically fireproof. 

“These trees live for so long and have experienced so much variability of climate, differences in wildfire, drought — they’ve seen it all,” Dixon said. “Having so many die in just two years was unprecedented.”

Mapping sequoia mortality from space

Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks have operated one of the most extensive prescribed burn programs in the United States, treating sequoia groves since the 1960s, the study said. This program created a mosaic of fire histories across the landscape, with some areas treated with prescribed fire and others that had not burned in more than a century. 

In collaboration with researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey and Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, the authors sought to understand the influence of prescribed fire on giant sequoias, which are particularly well-mapped in the parks. They integrated remote sensing data from airborne lidar and high-resolution imagery from PlanetScope satellites to quantify pre-fire fuel structures and to estimate wildfire outcomes for about 26,400 giant sequoias across 19 groves following the Castle and KNP Complex wildfires. 

Their analysis showed that prescribed burns conducted within the previous decade reduced the odds of death by about 77%. Trees receiving prescribed burn treatments were four times more likely to survive than untreated trees. Simulations suggested that previous prescribed burns prevented about 1,900 sequoia deaths. Had every tree in the groves been treated, an additional 3,900 would likely have survived, the study found. 

Prescribed fire a giant sequoia conservation tool

The study notes that climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of disturbances like wildfire in old-growth forests. Even fire-resistant giant sequoias are now vulnerable. The findings demonstrate that prescribed fire is an effective tool for their conservation.

“This is a timely study given the history of fire suppression in these forests and the state’s increasing pace and scale of fuel thinning in recent years,” Jin said. “By combining scalable, high-resolution remote sensing with a rigorous statistical framework, we were able to reveal insights on the effects of prescribed fires that go well beyond what traditional anecdotes or field surveys can tell us.”  

The study’s additional coauthors are Xiaoli Dong and Andrew Latimer of UC Davis, Adrian Das, David Soderberg and Nathan Stephenson of the USGS’ Western Ecological Research Center, and Anthony Caprio of Division of Resources Management and Science at Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. 

The study was funded by the NASA Land Cover and Land Use Change Program, California Strategic Growth Council, and the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

---

Journal

Nature Communications

DOI

10.1038/s41467-026-75418-6 

Article Title

Previous prescribed burns saved thousands of ancient sequoias during historically unprecedented wildfires

Article Publication Date

21-Jul-2026

 

An aerial view shows the aftermath of 2020's Castle Fire on Homers Nose Grove in Sequoia National Park.

Credit

Anthony Caprio/National Park Service

 

A giant sequoia stands in the Mariposa Grove in Yosemite National Park during a spring snow in 2026.

Credit

Kat Kerlin/UC Davis

Giant sequoias within prescribed burns were nearly four times more likely to survive extreme wildfire, a UC Davis study found. Existing burns saved about 1,900 giant sequoias, according to their analysis. 

Credit

Dan Dixon/UC Davis and National Agriculture Imagery Program/USDA-FSA, 2022

 

Triassic Inferno: Fires raged across Europe for thousands of years during past global warming

Utrecht University

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

Artist impression of the end-Triassic fern spike interval. Weeding and pioneering ferns are overgrowing the disturbed soils and remains of conifer forests.

view more 

Credit: Mark Garlick

The end-Triassic mass extinction, 201 million years ago, is linked to volcanism that resulted from the break-up of Pangea and which pumped out vast amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere causing extreme global warming of 5 to 10 degrees Celsius. As a result, tree-dominated vegetation collapsed and the highly disturbed landscapes were colonized by ferns that formed savannahs across large swaths of what is now Northwest Europe. New research by an international team led by geologists from Utrecht University and published in Nature Geoscience on 21 July 2026 has found that these fern savannahs were prone to large-scale burning, whereby the ferns themselves acted as the fuel that fanned the flames.

How to track wildfires in deep time

The research team had access to exceptional sedimentary material from 4 drill cores, including a recently drilled 640-meter-long core from the United Kingdom. The team generated paleo-fire records based on the abundance of fossil charcoal and organic molecules that form in the smoke emitted from wildfires, so-called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).

Combined with pollen and spore records, these proxy records show a period of intense wildfire activity during the main extinction interval coincident with the proliferation of ferns. However, charcoal records can be misinterpreted when larger pieces of charcoal break up in smaller fragments in the sample. Similarly, the PAHs emitted during wildfires do not necessarily land close to the wildfires, and the molecules may not be preserved at all. The team therefore came up with a novel way to track wildfire activity in deep time.

“The novelty of this study came from the analysis of color changes of organic microfossils,” explains Dr. Bas van de Schootbrugge from Utrecht University, a senior author on the paper. “We used a simple and very low-cost technique that quantifies the ‘darkness’ of fossil pollen and spores, a so-called Palynomorph Darkness Index.”

Coloring patterns

Normally, the color of organic microfossils can change when they get buried in sediments, due to pressure and temperature changes. As sediments get buried deeper over time, temperature increases with depth, causing the enclosed organic matter to become progressively more cooked. The deeper, the darker.

“But here we found a very different pattern,” Van de Schootbrugge says. In the oldest, deepest samples in the cores, the pollen and spores are light colored, but pollen and spores from the extinction interval itself become progressively extremely dark brown. After the extinction, colors return to a light yellow again. “We were quite puzzled by this phenomenon as it occurs in all 4 cores at exactly the same time, so it could not have been related to burial of the sediments as the four basins experienced very different geological histories,” Van de Schootbrugge explains.

The ‘Dark Zone’

The Palynomorph Darkness Index uses the RGB color spectrum measured with a camera attached to a light microscope and converts it into an average grey scale value that can be compared between samples within cores but also between cores from different locations. The team generated 15,000 measurements from both pollen and spores from plants that occur before, during, and after the extinction. And by comparing tree pollen and fern spores it was possible to exclude any biological effects specific for plant groups.

“All plant groups show the same effect, which is a strong indication that it was the result of an outside force.” By comparing the color changes in the microfossils to the other fire indicators, the team realized that this ‘Dark Zone’ was reflecting prolonged and intense wildfires in the fern spike interval. “The darkening overlaps exactly with the fern spike, the main extinction interval, and elevated abundance of charcoal and PAHs.”

Triassic inferno

The explosive growth of ferns within the main extinction interval was the result of a combination of factors including deforestation, soil erosion, strong greenhouse warming, and wildfire activity. Van de Schootbrugge: “Ferns are truly remarkable plants that have withstood many crises throughout Earth history, and some species can adapt to some of the most extreme environments. They can be considered to be true disaster species.”

Some ferns can rapidly spread across disturbed landscapes, and wildfires can stimulate the ferns to spread even further and faster. While ferns would burn aboveground, they can rapidly grow back from underground root systems, outcompeting other plants in the process. This effect likely played an important role in the duration of the fern spike interval that is estimated to have lasted from 40,000 years to perhaps as long as 300,000 years.

Fire ladders

“When the ferns dry out, the thick mats act as the ideal fuel to trigger massive wildfires,” Van de Schootbrugge explains. Weeding and pioneering ferns formed widespread fern savannahs, with some species functioning as fire ladders while smothering other vegetation. “Ferns responded to and delivered the fuel that fanned the flames, triggering repeated massive wildfires. A truly hellish world.”

“The lesson we can learn from this, is that the combination of climate change, deforestation, and the spread of opportunistic species can provide all the ingredients for a perfect storm,” Van de Schootbrugge concludes.

---

Journal

Nature Geoscience

DOI

10.1038/s41561-026-02048-4 

Method of Research

Experimental study

Subject of Research

Cells

Article Title

Continental-scale fern savannah wildfires during end-Triassic greenhouse warming

Article Publication Date

21-Jul-2026

Republicans Are Trying to Give Big Oil Immunity for Causing Climate Chaos

A new report further links fossil fuel emissions to extreme weather events. States are trying to make polluters pay.

By Mike Ludwig ,

Truthout

July 21, 2026

Smoke from massive wildfires in Canada and Minnesota engulfs the Washington, D.C. skyline, reducing visibility and casting a colored haze over the U.S. Capitol Building on July 17, 2026, in Washington, D.C.Finn Gomez / Getty Images

The science used to attribute extreme weather events to climate change has advanced remarkably in recent years, allowing policy makers, judges, and the public to see clear links between disasters and the fossil fuel emissions driving climate crisis. Now, as the links become clearer, oil and gas lobbyists are scrambling to shield the industry from a wave of lawsuits and state laws seeking to hold profiteers accountable for the damage that burning fossil fuels causes to communities and public health.

Developed over the course of three years by a panel of experts, the National Academies of Sciences published a report on July 16 updating and expanding on a landmark 2016 review that found climate attribution science had made “great strides” in explaining the increasing frequency of extreme weather such as heat waves, floods, extended droughts, and wildfires in the context of climate disruption caused by humans. The link between global warming and individual violent storms is less clear — but not in the tropics, where warming ocean temperatures are known to likely intensify hurricanes and cyclones.

The report found improvements over the past decade in datasets and model simulations that scientists use to determine whether climate change made an extreme weather event more likely or intense. Scientists are also improving the accuracy of “storyline event attribution,” which focuses on whether climate disruption shaped the physical processes leading up to a damaging event.

Uncertainties remain, but the report from one of the nation’s most trusted research institutions affirms that scientists can reliably link specific disasters to oil and gas emissions, according to Cassidy DiPaola, communications director for the Make Polluters Pay campaign.

“For years the fossil fuel industry has argued in court that climate change is just too global and too complex to connect specific harms to individual polluters, but in recent years attribution science has changed that,” DiPaola said in an interview. “This report only confirms that this field has matured into an incredibly rigorous scientific discipline, and it gives courts stronger evidence to evaluate the real-world consequences of fossil fuel pollution.”


Republicans Want to Punish Canada for “Exporting” Its Wildfire Smoke Into the US
The Republicans make no mention of experts’ warnings that the climate crisis is supercharging the wildfires. By Sharon Zhang , Truthout July 17, 2026

More than 40 cities and states have filed lawsuits against major fossil fuel companies for climate-related damages. The specifics vary, but in many cases the plaintiffs argue that companies including Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP engaged in deceptive advertising by failing to inform the public about research linking the burning of fossil fuels to the climate crisis. Lawsuits filed by California, Maine, New Jersey, and multiple municipalities also argue that air pollution is a “public nuisance” under state laws.

“It does not decide these cases, but the [National Academies] report makes it more difficult for the industry and its lawyers to argue that the science is not ready for the courtroom,” DiPaola said. “It just gives judges a better foundation for finding causation.”

Two dozen states have also introduced or passed into law what are known as “climate superfund bills,” which create funds paid into by fossil fuel polluters that states can use to pay for the costs of environmental cleanup and fixing infrastructure damaged by extreme weather attributed to climate change. The American Petroleum Institute, a top lobbying group for the industry, lists opposing state-level superfund bills as one of its top political priorities for 2026.

“The industry sees reports like this coming out from leaders in the scientific field, and they would rather ask lawmakers to shut down the climate superfund bills entirely and the lawsuits entirely,” DiPaola said.

Energy In Depth, a pro-industry publication and project of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, published an op-ed on July 14 claiming the “fingerprints of climate litigation activists” are “all over” the National Academies report, which should be viewed as “the latest deliverable in a well-funded litigation campaign.”

With droughts causing water shortages while deadly floods and heat waves increase in frequency, fossil fuel supporters in the Republican Party are addressing the climate crisis by attempting to shift the blame. The fight burst into public view over the past week as devastating wildfires in Canada burned out of control, filling skies across much of the Midwest and Northeast U.S. with smoke that forced millions of people indoors.

Experts say wildfires are a natural feature of Canada’s forests, and the recent outbreak likely resulted from a mix of human activity and persistent heat and drought driven by climate disruption, which makes fires bigger, hotter, and more destructive. However, President Donald Trump attacked Canada on July 17 over the wildfire smoke that drifted across the U.S. border in a nonsensical online post. Republicans in Congress also threatened to impose economic sanctions on Canada for “exporting” smoke, exacerbating tensions over Trump’s tariffs and antics on the world stage.

In 2023, a landmark study from the Union of Concerned Scientists directly linked coal, oil, and gas companies to worsening forest fires in the western United States. The study found that nearly 20 million acres — or 37 percent of the total area burned by forest fires in the western United States and southwestern Canada since 1986 — can be attributed to heat-trapping air pollution released by the 88 largest fossil fuel producers and cement manufacturers globally.

Forest fires are increasing in scale and occurring earlier in the season. In 2025, the number of people displaced from their homes by forest fires globally reached nearly 500 million, the highest level since 2020. Carly Phillips, a senior scientist with the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the organization’s forest fire attribution study and others like it, such as the new one from the National Academies, are critical pieces of scientific evidence for holding big polluters accountable.

“Attribution science has been a flashpoint, so that affirmation of the rigor and robustness of this science from the National Academies is key for affirming the utility of this type of research,” Phillips told Truthout.

Phillips pointed to a recent piece from the Wall Street Journal editorial board attacking the National Academies report as politically compromised. Phillips said the editorial follows a decades-long disinformation campaign against climate attribution science waged by the industry. The Journal accuses unnamed “trial lawyers” of staging a “climate coup” at the National Academies.

“It’s part of a broader pattern of attempting to discredit the National Academies and attribution science broadly, not for the science but for the process,” Phillips said. “But there’s no evidence. They are manufacturing controversy where there is none.”

DiPaola said Big Oil companies have increasingly turned to conservative media outlets and Republicans lawmakers to shield them from public scrutiny as science connects the deadly heat waves, fires, and floods in the headlines to climate disruption caused by fossil fuel pollution. In press releases and public communications, both the American Petroleum Institute and GOP lawmakers describe the state-level lawsuits and superfund bills as “extremist.”

“Attribution science is becoming more and more precise at the same time these liabilities cases are moving closer to discovery — and at the same time that industry is begging leaders in Congress to throw them out,” DiPaola said.

Big Oil executives would likely not want judges ordering them to hand over internal documents and testify under oath after repeated investigations revealed that Chevron and other companies knew that burning fossil fuels caused global warming decades ago but failed to warn the public and policy makers, DiPaola pointed out.

On April 17, Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyoming) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) introduced legislation in Congress to “protect American energy from leftist legal crusades” and the climate superfund laws introduced by Democratic lawmakers in two dozen states. At the state level, dark money right-wing groups are distributing model legislation that would quash climate accountability funds and lawsuits.

In a statement, Hageman said “state legislators and environmental extremists” are trying to “scapegoat” fossil fuel firms. The presidents of two lobbying groups — the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers and American Petroleum Institute — thanked Cruz and Hageman in a joint statement. After all, the climate superfund bills alone are “designed to inflict multi-billion-dollar penalties for past emissions and other alleged contributions to ‘climate change,’” according to a press release from Hageman’s office.

Vermont and New York were the first states to sign climate superfund bills into law. New York plans to recover $75 billion over 25 years from fossil fuel companies to pay for climate damage, and Vermont is still assessing the damage attributed to specific companies, according to DiPaola. Meanwhile, conservative lawmakers recently passed laws shielding fossil fuel companies from climate lawsuits in Utah, Tennessee, Iowa, and Oklahoma. Similar legislation is on the move in Louisiana.

Phillips said fights over who will pay for climate damages could have been avoided if the fossil fuel industry had been honest in decades past with the public and politicians about the dangers of burning fossil fuels, prompting an earlier start to a transition to clean energy. Instead, the industry and its allies continue to wage a disinformation campaign with the goal of “deceiving the public” and obstructing climate action.

“It did not have to be this way,” Phillips said. “It did not have to get to the point where these extreme storms and extended droughts are driving this level of harm and destruction.”

Trump signs order imposing new 50% tariffs on certain Canadian goods

US President Donald Trump signed orders on Monday imposing new 50% tariffs on some Canadian goods, citing what the White House called Canada's "discriminatory treatment" of US alcohol, automobiles and dairy products. The tariffs take effect in 30 days, with energy, potash and sector-specific imports exempted, the White House said.

Issued on 21/07/2026 
By: FRANCE 24

Global Container Terminals' Deltaport facility in Delta, British Columbia, Canada, July 16, 2026 © Darryl Dyck, The Canadian Press via AP

US President Donald Trump signed orders Monday to impose new 50-percent tariffs on many Canadian goods, claiming "discriminatory treatment" by Ottawa against American alcohol, automobile and dairy products.

The tariffs take effect in 30 days and cover a wide range of goods including wine, hockey sticks and cement, said the White House in a fact sheet.

Trump tapped a little-known legal provision for the new duties – Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 – which allows officials to take action against countries said to engage in discriminatory trade practices.

Cover image: © France 24
01:46

The latest duties will not apply to energy, potash and goods already impacted by sector-specific tariffs, the White House said.

Crucially, however, they will hit products covered under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA).

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said in response that Ottawa stands ready to "intensify" talks with the United States, and has made proposals to resolve disputes and modernise the USMCA.

"This is the latest in a series of unilateral US trade actions that began with the US imposing a series of tariffs in direct violation of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement," he added.

"Canada, as is its right, has merely matched those measures," Carney said.

While Trump has slapped sweeping duties on US trading partners since returning to the presidency last year, these have generally come with broad exemptions for goods entering his country under the North American free trade pact.

His latest actions threaten to further strain ties between Washington and Ottawa, and come just days after he threatened Canada with increased tariffs over smoke from raging wildfires that drifted into the United States.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

O, Canada: We’re doing everything we can to put Trump back in his cage

REUTERS Umit Bektas

Robert Reich

July 21, 2026

Trump on Monday signed orders to impose a 50 percent tariff on a wide range of Canadian imports.

The White House claims the tariffs are a “punishment” for Canadian discrimination against American cars, dairy, and alcohol.

But the tariffs will also punish us. Remember, tariffs are import taxes — paid for by you and me and everyone else in America. So, we’re about to pay more for everything we import from Canada — plywood, paper, furniture, hockey sticks, cement, et al. Canada is our second-largest trading partner, for chrissake.

Even if the Supreme Court finds that Trump lacks authority to invoke these tariffs and the government must refund American importers for the extra cost — as the high court did with his first round of tariffs — you and I won’t be reimbursed for the extra costs we’ve paid.

Corporations aren’t giving their customers any of the $80 billion in refunds they’ve received from the Treasury Department for the first round of tariffs, so don’t expect any reimbursement on this second round. Which means we’re doubly screwed.

Worse yet, the Treasury isn’t really bearing the cost of the $80 billion in refunds. The cost is being borne by you and me and all other American taxpayers, because our money funds the government. And as taxpayers we’ll also be paying for the second round of refunds, assuming the Supreme Court orders them. Which means we’re triply screwed.

Actually, we’re quadruply screwed because Trump is imposing the new tariffs under the Tariff Act of 1930 — the notorious Smoot-Hawley tariff that worsened the Great Depression by causing other countries to retaliate and impose tariffs on goods coming from the United States. It’s likely to have a similar effect in coming months.

If you hadn’t noticed, the American economy is already shaky. Prices are rising faster than wages, which means most of us are becoming poorer even before Trump’s next round of tariffs. His war in Iran is pushing up the price of gas and, indirectly, food.

The real reason for the new tariffs is that Trump is pissed off that Canada had the temerity (and the right) to retaliate against his first round of tariffs, and it has resisted Trump’s calls to be annexed as the 51st state.

Why would Canadians ever want to live in a nation that could elect Trump?

In any event, I believe I can speak for most Americans when I apologize to our Canadian friends. We’re sorry we elected him. He’s made our lives worse. He’s a continuing embarrassment to us. (Did you see him grandstand at the World Cup? We have to live with this crap every day.)

Believe me, we’re doing everything we can to put him back in his cage.

Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/.

Trump ‘Raising Prices on Americans Again’ With 50% Tariff on Canadian Imports

“Americans have to pay high prices because Trump doesn’t understand how wind works,” quipped one critic.


US President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney attend the North Atlantic Council meeting held as part of the 36th NATO Heads of State and Government Summit at the Presidential Complex in Ankara, Türkiye on July 8, 2026.
(Photo by Harun Ozalp/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
Jul 20, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

US President Donald Trump on Monday invoked an arcane legal provision to impose 50% tariffs on most imported goods from Canada, a move that critics said will hit US consumers already reeling from an unabated cost-of-living crisis and further strain relations with the nation’s second-largest trade partner.

Trump invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, an unprecedented move the White House said is aimed at “offsetting the burden and disadvantage on US commerce from Canada’s discriminatory treatment of US commerce” and “leveling the playing field for crucial American exports—cars, alcohol, and dairy.”

The new tariffs exempt energy products, potash, fish, and critical minerals.

“While the administration continues to secure fair and reciprocal trade deals with our trading partners, Canada, unlike other partners and allies, continues to retaliate against the United States for its efforts to rebalance trade and protect US industry in national security-sensitive sectors,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement.

“Specifically, Canada has taken US alcohol products off Canadian shelves, given better market access to dairy products from the European Union, and has put a cap on US vehicle exports to Canada from companies reshoring to the United States,” Greer added. “Today, President Trump took decisive action to hold Canada accountable for its retaliation and discrimination, delivering on his promise to correct trade imbalances and ensure fairness for American workers, farmers, and businesses.”

While the administration’s official communications cite economic reasons for the new tariffs, Trump in recent days has repeatedly cited the Canadian wildfires as justification for the move.

“I told them. I mean, you got to stop these fires from coming in, and you know poisoning our air,” Trump said of Canada on Sunday evening. “Our air has been poisoned. Maybe they should pay us some damages or something, or we should do some tariffs.”

The president’s linkage of the wildfires and tariffs drew widespread ridicule, with Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul posting on X, “Only Donald Trump could see wildfire smoke and decide the answer is more tariffs.”

Pod Save America co-host Dan Pfeiffer said on social media, “Americans have to pay high prices because Trump doesn’t understand how wind works.”

According to We Pay the Tariffs, a small business coalition, Trump’s capricious tariffs have cost American businesses and consumers upward of $317 billion since March 2025.

That month, Trump imposed 25% tariffs on many Canadian goods and 10% on Canadian energy products. The administration later modified or paused some of those tariffs.

Ottawa has criticized the tariffs and rejected the US justification that Canada is unfairly restricting American products.

“I’ll never stop fighting to protect Ontario,” Doug Ford, the province’s right-wing premier, said in response to Trump’s move. “If these tariffs proceed, Canada should respond tariff for tariff, dollar for dollar.”

Some Democratic US lawmakers blasted the new tariffs.

“Trump is raising prices on Americans, again, by jacking up tariffs by 50% on Canadian goods bought by Americans,” Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) said on social media. “Democrats will flip the House. And on day one of next term, Democrats will introduce legislation to repeal Trump’s disastrous tariffs. And we will pass it.”

Top Finance Committee Democrat Rips Trump’s New Canada Tariffs as ‘Yet Another Shakedown’

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman described Trump’s latest tariffs as “unutterably idiotic.”


Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) speaks at a press conference on the upcoming deadline for the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files, in Washington, DC on December 16, 2025.
(Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Jul 21, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Critics are piling on President Donald Trump for once again picking a fight with the United States’ top trading partner by moving to slap 50% tariffs on certain imported Canadian goods.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, said on Tuesday that Trump’s latest broadside against Canada was “yet another shakedown that will raise the cost of living for Americans, their families, and small businesses across the country.”

Wyden also said that Trump has “abused every trade authority at his disposal” and vowed to soon release a bill “to rein him in and put Congress back in the driver’s seat” in crafting US trade policy.

Wyden wasn’t the only Democrat to take a shot at Trump over his new economic attack on Canada.

Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) called Trump’s new tariffs “really dumb” given that they violate a trade deal that Trump himself negotiated with Canada and Mexico during his first term.

“You cannot negotiate a trade agreement, sign it, celebrate it, then blow it up and expect anyone to trust the next deal,” said Levin. “And who actually pays? American importers and American families. Tariffs are a tax on us.”

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) predicted that US consumers would once again pay the price for the president’s trade war.

“We’re the ones who will eat the cost,” wrote Huffman. “That’s what happened with Trump’s last tariff spree and it will happen again. Trump’s failed foreign and economic policies are making life worse for hardworking people.”

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman on Tuesday published an analysis trying to make sense of the justifications for Trump’s latest trade war with Canada, but he came up mostly empty.

“The White House fact sheet claims that the new tariffs are a response to Canadian policies that discriminate against US products,” explained Krugman, “notably the moves by most Canadian provinces... to stop importation of US alcoholic beverages. But these policies were themselves a response to the tariffs on Canadian goods Trump had previously imposed.”

Krugman then noted that Trump shifted his justification for the tariffs, saying they were designed to punish Canada after smoke generated by wildfires in Ontario billowed into the US last week.

However, Krugman found this explanation even more absurd.

“Blaming Canada for not controlling fires that are, in reality, largely a consequence of global warming,” Krugman remarked, “is unutterably idiotic.”

Krugman concluded his analysis by arguing that “whatever the real motivation for these new tariffs, they are almost surely illegal,” noting that they run afoul of Trump’s own North American trade deal.

Trump on Tuesday indicated that the tariffs on Canada were not actually a response to the wildfires, though he said his administration was looking at separate measures to punish the Canadian government for purportedly doing a poor job of managing its forests.



Several studies have found that Trump’s tariffs, which he kicked off in April 2025, have cost US businesses and consumers hundreds of billions of dollars, as importers pass most of the increased costs imposed by the tariffs to consumers in the form of higher prices.

'Swinging recklessly': WSJ slams Trump's 'senseless' attack on Canada

Matthew Chapman
July 21, 2026 
RAW STORY


U.S. President Donald Trump points a finger as he speaks during a roundtable on antifa, an anti-fascist movement he designated a domestic "terrorist organization" via executive order on September 22, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., October 8, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board was none too happy about President Donald Trump's latest "senseless" tariff order — this time a 50 percent punitive attack on Canada for perceived unjust trade practices.

The president has tried multiple times to issue broad-based tariffs around the world, which federal courts have slapped down. This also comes as Trump caused international tension by delaying opening of a critical international bridge set to boost trade between the U.S. and Canada.

'The White House on Monday exhumed Section 338 of the 1930 Tariff Act to impose 50% tariffs on hundreds of Canadian goods, including hockey sticks, honey, beer, down feathers, fishing rods and golf clubs," wrote the board, noting that they don't take effect for another month — a clear indication Trump wants to use them as a bargaining chip.

This power, which comes from the so-called "Smoot-Hawley Tariff" often blamed for exacerbating the Great Depression, "was intended to let the President retaliate against countries that impose tariffs on the U.S. Mr. Trump is using the law to punish Canada for retaliating against his tariffs. His tariff order cites Canada’s 25% tariffs on U.S. cars that exceed certain quotas, which were a response to Mr. Trump’s 25% duties on motor vehicles and parts."

These moves are colossally counterproductive to the economy of both countries, the board lamented: For instance, "A study in March found that the tourist dropoff has cost between 14,000 and 42,000 jobs in the U.S. markets most exposed to Canadian tourism. Northern border areas have also suffered from a decline in cross-border trade."

The American people are already running out of patience, the board warned.

"The more Mr. Trump keeps swinging recklessly, the more Americans are likely to think there’s only madness in his tariff methods," the board wrote.

Susan Collins in full-on retreat as Trump's new attack on Canada threatens her state

Matthew Chapman
July 21, 2026 

RAW STORY


Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) attends a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee confirmation hearing for Acting U.S. Secretary of Labor Keith Sonderling to be U.S. Secretary of Labor, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 16, 2026. REUTERS/Al Drago

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) was flailing for as much distance as possible as President Donald Trump moves to impose draconian new tariffs on Canada, according to a Politico report on Tuesday.

Collins, a top target for Democrats in a battleground Senate race, represents a state that directly borders the Canadian Maritime provinces.

“I have voted repeatedly against the Canadian tariffs,” said Collins in a statement to Politico. “Maine and Canada’s economies are very intertwined. A lot of our blueberries, our potatoes, our lobster, our lumber are harvested in Maine, processed in Canada and then come back. I don’t want to see the tariffs on the books.”

Bobby Charles, the GOP's nominee for governor, concurred with Collins.

“As Governor, Bobby will always prioritize Maine, even if that means taking a position contrary to the national elites of his party,” Vincent Harris, a senior strategist for Charles, told Politico in a statement.

If elected, Charles said he will travel to Washington to argue against Trump's tariffs.

Trump's new scheme, enacted under a controversial and hardly-ever-used 1930 tariff law, would put 50 percent import taxes on a range of Canadian products.

All of this comes amid a massive shakeup of the Maine Senate race, with Democrats pressuring their nominee Graham Platner to withdraw over credible allegations of sexual assault, and coalescing instead around state lawmaker Troy Jackson.

Trump fires warning shot at Canada: 'They need us to survive'

President Donald Trump with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on May 6, 2025 (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok/Flickr)

Thomas Kika

July 21, 2026

ALTERNET

President Donald Trump once again took aim at Canada after reigniting his feud with America's neighbor to the north, claiming "they need us to survive" during an Oval Office event on Wednesday.

Trump this week escalated his long-simmering feud with Canada after wildfires in the country blanketed much of the American Northeast and Midwest in dangerous levels of smoke, an occurrence becoming more common with the advance of climate change. Holding Canada responsible for the air quality threat, Trump threatened to impose new tariffs over the situation, and on Monday evening, announced that he would be setting a separate 50 percent tariff on certain Canadian goods in 30 days, claiming that this was in response to the country allegedly discriminating against U.S. exports.

Trump was pressed about the situation again during an Oval Office press conference, confirming that the newly-announced tariff is separate from the wildfire tariff, which he added that his administration is still looking at.

He also spoke further about his reasoning behind the new 50 percent tax, which Axios reported will impact things like "hockey sticks, wine and cement."

"It's a response to the way they've treated our farmers and our people," Trump said. "Canada has been very, very tough on us over the years, for many years, and no other president has done anything about it. I love Canada, I love the people of Canada, many friends that live in Canada. But their leadership from [former Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau to the current leadership, I mean, in all fairness to them, they need us to survive. Without us, there's no way they can survive. So... they've been very, very tough over a period of the last 50 years, actually."

“Over the past year, Canada has retained substantial retaliation against the United States as the U.S. imposes trade actions to reindustrialize, reshore, and support its manufacturing,” a senior Trump administration official told reporters during a call on Monday, according to The Hill. “Specifically, Canada has to be held accountable for this continued discrimination.”

White House advisers scramble to derail Trump's 'barrage' of new tariffs: report

Tom Boggioni
July 21, 2026 

RAW STORY

Donald Trump holds up an executive order. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Faced with the possibility that the Republican Party is headed for a wipeout in the November midterms, White House insiders are attempting to head off a Friday announcement by President Donald Trump of new tariffs.

Trump is preparing to impose what the Financial Times is calling a "barrage" of fresh tariffs on dozens of countries this week, but his own advisers are urgently counseling him to step back from the brink, the outlet's report states. Senior officials worry that resurrecting his trade war—which delivered economic shocks and voter backlash in his first term—could prove "catastrophic" heading into elections Republicans are already struggling to win.

According to the report, "Behind the scenes, senior officials have been counseling the president to maintain stability with trading partners and honor the deals that Washington struck with them to reduce their tariffs in 2025, according to two people familiar with the matter.”

The timing is particularly fraught. Existing 10 percent tariffs adopted after a Supreme Court decision in February struck others down are set to expire Friday and some in the White House are engineering probes "of forced labor practices, allowing Trump to avoid using the emergency authorities knocked down by the Supreme Court."

The prospect of renewed tariffs collides with an already-deteriorating economic landscape. The escalating Iran conflict has roiled energy markets, pushing gas prices back above $4 per gallon. Voters are already furious about the cost of living and recent polling found two-thirds of Americans disapprove of how Trump is managing affordability.

Adding tariff hikes to soaring energy prices risks "inflaming voter frustration over the high cost of living," a sign that even Trump's own team recognizes the political danger, the report notes.

"This does not mean that tariff hikes are in the rear-view mirror," Wendy Cutler, a former U.S. trade official now at the Asia Society Policy Institute, told the Financial Times. "But it does suggest that a more cautious approach is now called for, par