Trump's India tariffs further tangles an already tangled web

Donald Trump is putting an additional 25% tariff on imports from India, one of the very few American tariffs I.can actually get behind.

The stated reason for the imposition is India's continued and increasing purchases of Russian crude oil, which the civilized wotld is supposed to be sanctioning since Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. Before the Ukraine war, India imported just about 2% of its crude from Russia, but that has shot up to 35% today, as India takes advantage of Russia's bargain basement prices for its few remaining customers. No-one ever accused Narendra Modi of suffering from an excess of morality.

Thing is, though, where was Trump's outrage over India and Russia until now. Well, he has been trying to developed a bromance with both Putin and, more recently, Modi, but is clearly belatedly realizing that neither of them really want to be friends, let alone lovers. Trump is pretty slow in some respects.

And what is the logic of punishing India in this way, while leaving alone China, which is by far the largest importer of Russian oil, and a huge supporter of Russia's war effort? Consistency has never been Trump's strong suit.

The move also makes an already tangled web even more tangled. London-based environmental and human rights group Global Witness claim they have evidence that the US imported 30 million barrels of Russian oil, worth an estimated $180 million to the cash-strapped Kremlin, through, wait for it, India (and Turkey).

Doug Ford really doesn't like it when judges (and Ontario voters) oppose him

Doug Ford is desperately trying to be Mayor of Toronto again. He never quite got over losing that election back in 2014.

He has been trying to interfere in Toronto's bike-lane policy for months now. He claims it slows down his commute into the office. Well, that's not quite what he says in so many words, but reading between the lines...

The Ontario Superior Court, however, ruled, with evidence to back it up, that Ford's proposed lane removals would put people at an "increased risk of harm and death" and violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Now, he's claiming that "a judge overrules the people of Ontario because of ideology", and that the court ruling is "ridiculous" (by which he omeans he disagrees with it). Well, as it happens, the people of Toronto - the relevant part of Ontario in this case - are 80% behind expanding bike lanes according to recent polls. Ford's own reaction wouldn't be due to ideology, would it?

The man is well past his sell-by date. Bring on the next election.

Who understands the repercussions of all these tariffs?

The US tariffs on Canadian exports are hard to understand - both the theory and the practice.

For example, I read that "Canadian aluminum, steel products dealt biggest blow from US duties". But isn't aluminum and steel covered by CUSMA, and therefore exempt from the tariffs? Is it, then, just a small percentage of aluminum and steel exports that is actually being tariffed? Aluminum and steel are being at a different rate (50%), and with a different "justification" - does this invalidate the CUSMA defence? None of this clear to me.

I also read that between 80% and 90% of Canadian exports to the US are covered by The CUSMA agreement, and therefore exempt from the 35% tariffs we are supposedly subject to (other than energy and potash sales, which attract a 10% tariff). I have seen figures of 86%, 90%, 95% - there does not seem to be a definitive figure. 

But that seems to be a theoretical figure anyway, and many businesses have never bothered with the onerous paperwork of proving that their products are CUSMA-compliant. So, the actual figure is probably a lot less, but no-one seems to really know. Many smaller companies that have never officially registered their products under CUSMA are now scrambling to do so, so the actual figure is probably something of a moving target.

I don't know whether Trump understands all this - maybe he's smarter than he seems - certainly he has a whole department keeping track of it all for him. But I have a suspicion that hardly anybody really understands it all in detail. The Canadian case may be more complicated than most, what with the CUSMA to take into account too. Presumably, somebody in the Canadian civil service understands it pretty well, and is keeping track of it. Me, I've just about given up.

Why Canada's EV initiative faltered

It makes depressing reading, but we have to face up to the extent to which Canada's electric vehicle (EV) initiative is failing.

While EV sales are booming in much of the world, Canada (and the USA) is lagging badly. EVs now make up about 25% of new passenger vehicle sales worldwide, up from 3% just six years ago. That stat hides figures for some countries that are well in excess of that: Norway 86%, China 53%, UK 36%, EU 28%.

There are many other countries where EV sales make up more than 50%, some of which may be surprising: Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Netherlands and Iceland (not so surprising), and Nepal and Ethiopia (more surprising).

And Canada? 8% (the tiny little green bar on the right), down from 12% a year ago. Provincially, Quebec and BC are still batting above the national average, but even they are down significantly (Quebec down to 15% from 26% a year ago). Even the USA had slightly better figures than Canada, at 9%.

The reason is deliberate (and short-sighted) policy changes over the last year, at both the federal and principal levels. The federal government ended its $5,000 EV rebate program, Quebec ended its $7,000 rebates, benighted Ontario ended its rebate program years ago. Quebec has since brought its rebate back, at a much lower $4,000 level. The feds are talking about bringing back an EV rebate, but don't hold your breath.

Then, the federal carbon tax was ended (telegraphed well in advance) by the "new" Liberal governemnt, and BC also ended its long-standing carbon tax, all of which made gas vehicles more attractive, at the expense of EV sales.

And, arguably the big one, although it's a tricky moral decision to get your head (and heart) around, the decision to slap a 100% tariff on the important of inexpensive (and apparently excellent) Chinese EVs, making.them unaffordable for most Canadians. How do you think countries like Ethiopia and Nepal were able to increase their EV share so dramatically? Cheap Chinese imports, of course.

Given all these stacked factors, what did they think was going to happen? EVs down, ICE vehicles up, big time. This was, then, a deliberate decision to throw the environment under the bus - almost literally - mainly, as far as I can tell, to remain in lockstep with a rampant maverick USA with which we have almost nothing in common anyway these days.

And that (rather aspirational) Canadian "EV mandate" of 20% for EVs by 2026? Well, as the.next chart shows, we were on track for that until all these set-backs and road-blocks were placed in the way. Now, there is no way the goal can be achieved, and the subsequent much higher goals now look laughable.

What a sad state of affairs. And if you thought a new Liberal government was going to suddenly turn things around, well, it's clearly not going to happen any time soon.

The "economic miracle" of Burkina Faso

Speaking of dramatic national turnarounds, a friend was.singing the praises of the economic and social miracle that is modern-day Burkina Faso. 

Most people probably reach for a globe when Burkina Faso is mentioned, which is seldom. It's land-locked country in western Africa, located south of the deserts of Mali and north of the jungles of Ghana, perhaps best known for its euphonious Ouagadougou.

For most of the 20th century, Burkina Faso, then known as Upper Volta, was a French colony, and was kept down as one of the least-developed countries in the world while France benefited from its rich natural resources. The old story.

It did gain its independence from France in 1960, but still remained largely tied to France until a couple d'état brought Captain Thomas Sangara to power in 1983. In his short four year tenure, Sangara brought in a series of revolutionary programs, including mass vaccinations, infrastructure improvements, the expansion of women's rights, the encouragement of domestic agricultural consumption, and anti-desertification projects, and a national name change. He nationalized land and mineral wealth, rejected foreign aid, developed literacy campaigns, and redistributed land to the peasants, in a thorough-going social and politcal revolution.

But, in 1987, Sangara - "Africa's Che Guevara" - was assassinated, and his one-time friend and accomplice Blaise Compaoré took over the presidency (with the clandestine  help of France and the CIA). Compaoré proceeded to reverse almost all of Sangara's progressive changes, taking the country back into the political and economic orbit of France (and the debt of the IMF).

So, Burkina Faso limped along, amid exteme poverty, protests, coups and Jihadist insugencies, until a final coup in 2022 brought the young Captain Ibrahim Traoré to power, and soon to the officially-elected presidency. Traoré then tried his best to turn the clock back to the heady days of 1984, and to re-institute many of the policies of his hero and mentor Thomas Sangara.

It is Traoré's remarkable economic turnaround that my friend was telling me about. Under Traoré, Burkina Faso has: achieved an 18% increase in GDP in just two years; slashed ministerial and parliamentary salaries by 30%, while increasing civil service wages by 50%; paid off local clients and rejected new IMF and World Bank loans; nationalized the gold mines and stopped the export of unrefined gold to Europe; achieved huge increases.in local agricultural production (rice, millet, tomatoes, etc); declared a "general mobilization" to fight the ongoing Islamic insurgency; and taken steps to limit foreign intelligence operations (e.g. by the CIA).

For his pains, France initiated a furious political backlash against Traoré, and the IMF and World Bank warned of his "unsustainable economic policies". The Western media has labelled him as "authoritarian" and a "dictator". This is all not unexpected in the circumstances.

Of course, me being an ingrained cynic, my first reaction to my friend's gushing description of the Bukina Faso "economic miracle" was: what is she not telling me? Or, given that she gets much of her information from Facebook, what does she not know?

Predictably, just like the El Salvador story I described earlier, there is a dark side to all the good. The revolutionary equivalent to "no such thing as a free lunch"). As with the El Salvador case, the progress came with a side order of human rights abuses: the criminalization of homosexuality; curtailment of press freedom, with journalists facing harassment or detention for criticism of the government. 

But these concerns are relatively minor (certainly as compared to El Salvador). Surveys shown that 66% of Salvadorians now support military rule under Traoré, compared to 24% in 2012, and there are regular ecstatic public rallies in support of the regime. Young people feel empowered for the first time in their lives, and happy to be released from the yoke of French domination.

Traoré will remain in power at least until 2029. Among his goals during the this time are: construction of a new larger airport; expansion of the domestic agriculture and manufacturing sectors; development.od a national pharmaceutical industry; and a comprehensive reform of the education system. Ambitious stuff. 

It remains your be seen whether Burkina Faso will be seen a role model by other ex-colonial African countries. As Traoré himself says, "Our struggle is not just for Burkina Faso. It is for all of Africa, and for all peoples who believe that another world - one of dignity, sovereignty and justice - us possible." 

"Coolest dictator" Bukele consolidates his power as critics move in

President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador is something of a mystery. Although he once called himself the "coolest dictator", supposedly as a joke, he is now moving dangerously close to just that. 

Last week, he abolished term limits in a bid to extend his presidency. He also extended presidential terms to six years, moved the time of the next elections up by two years, and introduced constitutional changes eliminating run-off elections.

Most Salvadorians, though, are just fine with that. You see, Bukele's radical policies over the last ten years or so have been highly successful in eradicating El Salvador's major scourge: gang violence. Moving from the one-time murder capital of the world to one of the world's safest countries, Bukele's no-nonsense crackdown on gangs has been life-changing for Salvadorians. Homicides fell from several thousand a year to just over 100, making it (on paper at least) safer than Canada. For the first time in decades, their children can safely play on the streets, and businesses can ply their trades without threats of extortion. 

Bukele's popularity is still soaring, and the economy is humming along, even if in a rather lacklustre fashion. He has struggled to improve the economy compared to neighbours like Costa Rica, Guatemala and Nicaragua, and he has borrowed heavily from the country's pension fund to make ends meet.

But what has really given Salvadorians pause is the way in which Bukele has achieved his minor miracles. As I wrote a couple of years ago, with a flourish, he has swept away what few checks and balances El Salvador had, presided over widespread abuses in the country's draconian prison system, ended a popular ban on metal mining, evicted dozens of family farms with no explanation, and made huge mass arrests with little or no judicial overview. 

His tactics have raised alarms among human rights groups, and he has also  involved himself in various suspect projects from embracing cryptocurrencies to imprisoning deportees for Donald Trump, with whom Bukele is often adduced to be carrying on quite a bromance. Critics are also calling for more economic growth, basic social programs, and help with rising costs, to go with his security changes. There has been a spate of public protests this year, and a high-profile petition led by the country's Catholic bishops, almost unheard of until recently. Some worry that El Salvador under Bukele will go the way of Venezuela or Cuba.

There are even allegations (with some evidence) that Bukele agreed some sort of pact with gang leaders to lower the murder rate (or at least to give the appearance of that), and that he has had critics arrested for trumped-up money-laundering charges.

So, Bukele's path is not completely clear. But, for now at least, Salvadorians are willing to give him a few more years to consolidate his gains (and theirs). The problem is, he has just cemented in his rule, possibly for good, and democracy in the country has taken a serious hit.

How to avoid gerrymandering

There's some more weird shit going down in American politics, and this one, surprisingly, is only indirectly related to Donald Trump.

51 of the 62 Democrat Texas representatives have decamped en masse to New York, Boston and Chicago. They're not on vacation, though they may as well be, but it's all part of a ploy to prevent the majority Republicans from passing gerrymandering legislation. See, the Texas constitution requires a two-thirds majority vote for his kind of legislation, and by absenting themselves in this way, the Democrats can prevent the chamber from achieving the necessary quorum for a vote. Et voilá!

Smoke and mirrors? Maybe. But it works, at least temporarily. (I'm not sure what the long-term plan is.) The Republicans, of course, are incensed, and governor Greg Abbot has put out civil arrest warrants for the rebels, although the legality of that move is not clear either. The absconded Democrats are now outside the jurisdictional reach of the Texas authorities. Some pretty nasty words are being exchanged by the two camps.

The Republicans' gerrymandering project is designed to re-draw the congressional lines in the state in order to create five new safe Republican seats in an attempt to save the Republican majority in the House when the mid-terms come aroundin 2026, at a time when their (and Trump's) polling is tanking. This is what the minority Democrats are.so keen to avoid by this rather desperate strategy.

Gerrymandering - a corruption of the democratic system dating back to 1812, and named after the then Governor of Massachusetts Elbridge Gerry and a salamander-shaped voting district he created - is rife in America, and perfectly legal in some states, where state politicians (rather than an independent body) are in control of drawing congressional lines, which seems crazy to us. It should be noted that both the Republicans and the Democrats are happy to use it, given the opportunity. 

Princeton University has produced this handy-dandy interactive guide to which states are the most egregiously gerrymandered and which are relatively free from this kind of partisan redistributing. For example, Texas, Kansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Ohio are among the worst offenders, and there the partisan advantage is firmly Republican. However, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Illinois and South Caolina are also among the worst, but there the advantage is to the Democrats. (As you see, a partisan advantage in the redistricting rules does not always translate to a voting advantage.) However, about half the states, marked in green on the map, have their congressional boundaries drawn by independent redistricting commissions, usually every 10 years.

It seems inconceivable to me that states can change their own congressional boundaries to suit their own partisan purposes, and even more conceivabke that the rules on this vary.from state to state. Why is is not federally legislated that independent commisoms are.needed in all states to re-draw congressional maps at fixed intervals to accommodate demographic changes? Heart of democracy my arse!

Trump's firing of jobs commissioner another step beyond democracy

We are by now well used to Donald Trump using bully tactics to get what he wants. But recently he is starting to stray into dictator tactics, and that's a worrying development.

His latest enormity is to sack Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the agency responsible for producing national employment reports as well as consumer and producer price data. 

The Commisioner, the effective head of the agency, is actually a political appointee (Ms. McEntarfer was appointed in January 2024 after an 86-8 Senate vote), even though the agency as a whole is considered independent, and so technically Trump does have the power to hire and fire her. But this action, one of many on a slippery slope towards authoritarianism, has really set alarm bells ringing.

Trump fired Entarfer in a fit of pique after she announced weaker than expected jobs data, and also revised downwards employment figures for May and June after new data came to light. McEntarfer, of course claims she was just doing her job - such revisions are common occurrences, and a poor employment report was not unexpected given Trump's tariff moves - but Trump says she "RIGGED" the jobs figures "to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad". Furthermore, in case you didn't get the message, "The Economy is BOOMING under TRUMP".

As with Trump's repeated threats to fire Jerome Powell, chair of the US Federal Reserve, these ad hominem attacks and threats to shoot the messenger when the message does not suit him, can only lead to a further deterioration in public trust in a system already seriously destabilized by Trump's words and actions.

And of this behaviour seems familiar, you may be thinking of Josef Stalin, who had a penchant for this kind of thing, or the Communist Party of China in its heyday, or Argentina in 2013, or Greece in 2010. It never ends well.