Why Kawhi Leonard Should Stay in Canada

Well, Kawhi Leonard, you’ve really done it now.

You’ve gone ahead and won the Toronto Raptors their first NBA championship.

You were so, so great, the Finals MVP. You’re the quiet stranger who changed basketball in Canada. Now you’re about to be a free agent, with the chance to leave and chart your own course.

We’re going to respectfully ask you to stay. It’s your call, of course, but it’s the correct call. Please, Kawhi.

Run it back with Canada. Don’t abandon the happy dinosaurs, still floating after knocking off the Golden State Warriors Thursday night.

If you were hoping to slip out the back door without anyone noticing, that’s not possible now. The Raptors traded for you last summer, after things got ugly in San Antonio, and you didn’t get a say in that deal. The presumption was you would endure a season up in the frozen north, then wind your way to where you really wanted to go—perhaps a warm destination in Southern California, where you are from.

But you know the correct destination, Kawhi. You’re already there.

This is a perfect marriage, between a low-key superstar and a franchise and city that understands him. The Raptors didn’t just embrace you. They became you. The whole outfit is modest, mellow, hard-working, all business. The Raptors may not have been a popular preseason pick to win this title, but they believed.

.. We love that you’re chill. That you don’t say much. This is a hyper-verbal society. We’ve all got too much to say, to the point all the words and syllables grind into a dull, meaningless noise. That’s not your deal. When you speak, it means something. It matters. You’re old-school that way.

But it isn’t just your silent mien. Your whole style is understated. Your game is electric, but you’ve never been about the sizzle. You’re sponsored by New Balance, for crying out loud. The Yeezys of dentists. It’s perfect.

You’re a national treasure now in Canada. That kind of statement probably makes you uncomfortable. You’re the most important Raptor in franchise history, after one season. Teams throw up statues for lesser accomplishments.

You don’t owe Toronto anything. We should be clear about that. They know what they traded for, the terms, and the possibility you could leave. You’ve earned the right. It’s an important milestone in a player’s career, and all of us would want to take a look around.

So look around! There are openings throughout the league. There’s long been speculation that you’d wind up with the Los Angeles Clippers, who are on the way up, but are also, you know, the Los Angeles Clippers. Of course, there’s also space across the hall with LeBron James’s Lakers, but you don’t want any part of that. They’re like the Bizarro Raptors; everything about the Lakers is backward.

You could try Brooklyn. It’s nice in Brooklyn. There’s a lot of yoga.

Of course, you could be a Knick. But, and we’ve said this before, friends don’t let friends become Knicks. Besides, the Knicks now have the opportunity to give a max contract to an aging player with a ruptured Achilles tendon, and that is probably too enticing a possibility for them to turn down.

You already know the correct move, Kawhi. Yes, you are under no obligation. Toronto will probably retire your number, even if you leave. Yes, there are tax issues with playing across the border, but we’re going to give you the number for the Journal’s tax genius, Richard Rubin, who might have some ideas. I don’t know if Richard knows Canadian tax laws, but he probably knows someone who does.

The future is where you are, Kawhi. How many athletes get to make an indelible bond like the one you’ve made in Toronto? You’re as big as Tim Horton. Drake calls you.

You’ve written the fairy tale, Kawhi. Now write the sequel. Up north.

Trump’s Tariffs, Once Seen as Leverage, May Be Here to Stay

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s tariffs were initially seen as a cudgel to force other countries to drop their trade barriers. But they increasingly look like a more permanent tool to shelter American industry, block imports and banish an undesirable trade deficit.

More than two years into the Trump administration, the United States has emerged as a nation with the highest tariff rate among developed countries, outranking Canada, Germany and France, as well as China, Russia and Turkey. And with further trade confrontations brewing, the rate may only increase from here.

On Tuesday, the president continued to praise his trade war with China, saying that the 25 percent tariffs he imposed on $250 billion worth of Chinese goods would benefit the United States, and that he was looking “very strongly” at imposing additional levies on nearly every Chinese import.

I think it’s going to turn out extremely well. We’re in a very strong position,” Mr. Trump said in remarks from the White House lawn. “Our economy is fantastic; theirs is not so good. We’ve gone up trillions and trillions of dollars since the election; they’ve gone way down since my election.”

He called the trade dispute “a little squabble” and suggested he was in no rush to end his fight, though he held out the possibility an agreement could be reached, saying: “They want to make a deal. It could absolutely happen.” Stock markets rebounded on Tuesday, after plunging on Monday as China and the United States resumed their tariff war.

Additional tariffs could be on the way. Mr. Trump faces a Friday deadline to determine whether the United States will proceed with his threat to impose global auto tariffs, a move that has been criticized by car companies and foreign policymakers. And despite complaints by Republican lawmakers and American companies, Mr. Trump’s global metal tariffs remain in place on Canada, Mexico, Europe and other allies.

The trade barriers are putting the United States, previously a steadfast advocate of global free trade, in an unfamiliar position. The country now has the highest overall trade-weighted tariff rate at 4.2 percent, higher than any of the Group of 7 industrialized nations, according to Torsten Slok, the chief economist of Deutsche Bank Securities. That is now more than twice as high as the rate for Canada, Britain, Italy, Germany and France, and higher than most emerging markets, including Russia, Turkey and even China, Mr. Slok said.

[A trade war with China could be long and painful.]

The shift is having consequences for an American economy that is dependent on global trade, including multinational companies like Boeing, General Motors, Apple, Caterpillar and other businesses that source components from abroad and want access to growing markets overseas.

While trade accounts for a smaller percentage of the American economy than in most other countries — just 27 percent in 2017, compared with 38 percent for China and 87 percent for Germany, according to World Bank data — it is still a critical driver of jobs and economic growth.

Mr. Trump and his economic advisers say the administration’s trade policy is aiding the American economy, companies and consumers. And despite the tough approach, the administration continues to insist its goal is to strike trade agreements that give American businesses better trade terms overseas.

At a briefing last week, Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, praised the president’s trade policies for helping economic growth thus far and said the administration supports “free and fair reciprocal trade.”

But if the goal really is freer trade, the administration has never been further from achieving that goal than it is today, said Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

“They’re heading in the opposite direction,” Mr. Bown said.

Beyond an update to the United States agreement with South Korea, no other free trade deals have been finalized. Mr. Trump’s revisions to the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico still await passage in Congress, while trade talks with the European Union and Japan have been troubled from the start, with governments squabbling over the scope of the agreement.

Mr. Trump came into office fiercely critical of the failure of past administrations and global bodies like the World Trade Organization for failing to police China’s unfair trade practices. He withdrew the United States from multilateral efforts like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a multicountry trade deal negotiated by President Barack Obama, and the Paris climate accord.

That shift has created an opening for other countries to step forward as global leaders, including Europe, Japan and China, despite its position as one of the world’s most controversial economic actors. On Tuesday, China submitted its proposals for overhauling the World Trade Organization, including broadening the privileges of developing countries, a status that China claims for itself.

Advocates of free trade fear that governments in India, China, South Africa and elsewhere might find Mr. Trump’s model of protectionism appealing and erect even higher barriers to foreign companies.

While the United States and China could still strike a trade deal that would roll back many of their tariffs, that likelihood has appeared to diminish in recent weeks.

Progress toward a deal came to a sudden halt this month when China backtracked on certain commitments and Mr. Trump threatened to move ahead with higher tariffs.

“We had a deal that was very close, and then they broke it,” he said on Tuesday.

The two sides continue to disagree over whether the deal’s provisions must be enshrined in China’s laws. But they are also arguing over Mr. Trump’s tariffs, which were intended to prod the Chinese to agree to more favorable trade terms for the United States. China insists those tariffs must come off once a deal is reached, but the Trump administration wants some to remain in place, to ensure China abides by its commitments.

In an interview on Tuesday on CNBC, Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, supported the administration’s tactics.

“Ideally, you wouldn’t have tariffs,” he said. But the United States already faces “all kinds of impediments” to gaining access to the Chinese marketplace, including tariffs, subsidization of industries and theft of intellectual property.

“We already have a series of hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese penalties against the United States which are threatening our long-term viability,” Mr. Rubio said.

Canada and Mexico have repeatedly pressed the administration to lift its tariffs on steel and aluminum now that negotiations over the Nafta revision are done. The three countries signed the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement in November, but the pact awaits passage in all three legislatures.

The Trump administration still views the tariffs as a source of leverage in case it needs to demand final changes to the deal from Canada and Mexico. But Canadian and Mexican officials — as well as many in Congress — say the levies are actually an impediment because all three legislatures will refuse to finalize the deal while they are in place.

A similar standoff could soon unfold with the European Union, which Mr. Trump has accused of being a “brutal trading partner” and being “tougher than China.”

The president, who wants Europe to open its markets to American farmers and companies, has already imposed tariffs on European metals and is threatening to levy a 25 percent tax on imports of European cars and car parts if the bloc does not give the United States better trade terms.

Europe has absorbed Mr. Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs without too much damage. But car tariffs would strike the most important industry in Germany, which has the Continent’s biggest economy. European officials would regard car tariffs as a breach of a truce they worked out last year with Mr. Trump, and they have said they would refuse to negotiate as long as car tariffs were in place.

Cecilia Malmstrom, the European commissioner for trade, repeated on Monday that the European Union had prepared a list of American products worth $22.5 billion — including ketchup, suitcases and tractors — that would face immediate retaliatory tariffs.

“We’re prepared for the worst,” Ms. Malmstrom said in an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper in Germany.

European officials still hold out hope that Mr. Trump will see them as allies and not geopolitical rivals like the Chinese. And he could ultimately delay the decision and extend the Friday deadline for countries that are in trade talks with the United States.

But the president shows no signs of backing away from his stance that tariffs have helped the United States.

On Tuesday morning, Mr. Trump posted on Twitter that tariffs had rebuilt America’s steel industry and were encouraging companies to leave China, making it “more competitive” for buyers in the United States.

“China buys MUCH less from us than we buy from them, by almost 500 Billion Dollars, so we are in a fantastic position,” Mr. Trump tweeted. “Make your product at home in the USA and there is no Tariff.”

Putin Punches Above His Weight

Russian president’s global strategy keeps Moscow’s tentacles in enough places that the Kremlin is ensured a seat at every table that matters

You’ve got to give Vladimir Putin his due: The man knows how to play a weak hand well.

With relatively little investment, the Russian leader is expanding his toehold in the Western Hemisphere and potentially getting access to giant oil and uranium supplies by backing a dictator in Venezuela.

With relatively little investment, he has expanded his base of operations in the Middle East by propping up a dictator in Syria and by trying to send some sophisticated Russian military equipment into Turkey. (For the latter effort, he’d actually turn a profit.)

And with relatively little investment, and little notice from a distracted international community, he has kept up a low-level war against those fighting a Russian takeover in eastern Ukraine, holding on to a bargaining chip he might find useful someday.

He does all this while overseeing an economy roughly the size of South Korea’s, which produces little or nothing the world wants to buy, outside of oil and military gear.

It’s an audacious strategy—and it is working. Never was that more clear than last week, when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and national security adviser John Boltoncited Russian support as the only reason Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro remained in his country in the face of an organized uprising by his opponents and elements of his own military.

.. In short, Mr. Putin appears to recognize the moment he is in, and what to do about it. After almost two decades of a focus on combating terrorism and Islamic extremism, the world is evolving into a new era of big-power competition. The U.S. and China are the two big competitors now, of course, but Mr. Putin is making sure Russia is the third.

His problem is that Russia doesn’t have the economic might of the U.S. and China. So he brings to the table what he can, which is basically the ability to make trouble and thereby insert himself into the global mix.

Thus, Russia became an early world leader in the 21st-century tool of unconventional combat—cyber warfare. The Kremlin combined that skill with its traditional willingness to engage in the dark arts of covert action to interfere with the 2016 election in the U.S., as well as other elections in the West.

As the U.S. tries to maintain economic pressure on North Korea, Russia provides just enough economic relief to Pyongyang to ensure that Moscow has to be a player in how the standoff over North Korea’s nuclear program plays out.

Meanwhile, Mr. Putin is wedging himself into the space between East and West by offering to sell Russia’s S-400 air-defense system to Turkey, which happens to be a member of the American-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization. After members of Congress declared that Turkey couldn’t both buy the American-made F-35 jet fighter and have a Russian air-defense system geared toward shooting down that same jet, Russia stepped up and said it also would sell its own jet fighters to Turkey instead.

What is Russia’s goal in all this? Probably, in the first instance, it’s simply to keep Russia in the global game. By ensuring that Moscow’s tentacles are in enough places, Mr. Putin can win a seat at every table that matters. Thus does he maneuver to restore the global importance of Russia, which he thinks was unjustly stolen by the combination of the Soviet Union’s collapse and the West’s maneuvers to marginalize a once-great power.

Only in the second instance, most likely, is the Putin goal to gain some particular advantage or asset. Russia fishes in troubled waters. One day it may catch something that turns out to be valuable.

Venezuela may be the best current example of this strategy. Asked why Russia seems to want a beachhead in Venezuela, a senior U.S. official replies simply: “Why not?”

Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves and uranium reserves second only to Canada’s, the official notes. The world markets for oil and uranium matter greatly to Russia, whose economy is based almost entirely on such commodities, so having a hand on such big parts of the world supply can’t hurt.

And preserving a base of operations in Venezuela helps strategically in the continuing effort to keep the U.S. off balance and reactive. Russia already has plenty of influence in Cuba, but Venezuela may be a safer location for a Western Hemisphere foothold. “Cuba is too close to the U.S.,” the senior official says. “Venezuela is a better base of operations.” As noted: Why not try?

https://www.economist.com/the-americas/2019/04/17/albertas-new-premier-plans-to-abolish-the-carbon-tax

Jason Kenney, the newly elected premier, is set to clash with Justin Trudeau, Canada’s prime minister

“HELP IS on the way, and hope is on the horizon,” proclaimed Jason Kenney after his United Conservative Party decisively won the election in Alberta, an oil-producing province in western Canada, on April 16th. He was talking to Albertans depressed by a downturn in the oil industry, which has pushed up unemployment and left empty a quarter of the office space in Calgary, the province’s biggest city. For Justin Trudeau, Canada’s Liberal prime minister, Mr Kenney’s victory is more a source of worry than of hope.

Although Alberta’s slump was largely caused by factors beyond the province’s control—notably the fall in oil prices in 2014-15—voters took their anger out on the government of Rachel Notley of the left-leaning New Democratic Party. Her election four years ago had been a first for a province with a reputation for Texas-like conservatism and suspicion of the federal authorities in Ottawa. Ms Notley is a defender of the province’s oil industry, which extracts the stuff expensively from tar sands. She lobbied hard for an expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline to take more oil to the Pacific coast for export.

But she is also an environmentalist, and introduced a carbon tax, now C$30 ($22) a tonne, to discourage greenhouse-gas emissions. In striking this balance she had an ally in Mr Trudeau, who championed the pipeline but also passed a law requiring provinces to set a price on carbon emissions or to submit to one imposed by the federal government.

Much of Canada has resisted that grand bargain. The province of British Columbia, the pipeline’s terminus, remains opposed to the project on environmental grounds. In August 2018 the federal government took it over from Kinder Morgan, the frustrated US-based firm trying to build it. Moreover, four provinces led by conservative premiers—Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and New Brunswick—are fighting Mr Trudeau’s carbon price in the courts.

Alberta will now join them. Mr Kenney, a former federal immigration minister described by Maclean’s, a magazine, as a “Guinness-sipping nerd”, is expected

  • swiftly to kill the provincial carbon tax. He plans to
  • raise an emissions cap on tar sands oil production and s
  • low down plans to eliminate coal-fired electricity. He has
  • threatened to cut off British Columbia from shipments of Alberta’s oil if it continues to oppose the pipeline expansion. Mr Kenney also
  • promises to bring “tens of thousands of jobs” to Alberta by slashing environmental and labour regulation, and by reducing the corporate-tax rate from 12% to 8%.

At first glance, his victory will pose additional problems for Mr Trudeau, who has been hurt by allegations that his office put improper pressure on the country’s attorney-general to drop the prosecution of a Quebec-based engineering company. He faces a re-election battle in October. But Mr Trudeau may not mind a fight over climate policy. According to a poll conducted in March by Abacus Data, 69% of Canadians say climate change is one of the top five issues they will consider when they vote. Just 28% of Canadians are firmly opposed to a carbon tax.

The federal government has the power to override British Columbia’s opposition to the pipeline expansion. It could do so as early as May 22nd. That gives Mr Trudeau some hope that he can rescue his energy grand bargain, despite Mr Kenney’s opposition to the carbon tax.

Alberta’s new premier may benefit from an upturn in the province’s growth. The unemployment rate was 6.9% in March. That is still 1.1 percentage points above the national rate, but it is well below the peak of 9.1% in November 2016. TD Financial Group, a bank, predicts that Alberta’s economy will grow by 2.4% in real terms next year, the fastest rate in the country, thanks in part to a rise in oil prices. The sunnier outlook has nothing to do with the new premier’s pro-oil policies. That will not stop him from taking the credit.