Meetings between the leaders of Canada and the United States are rarely seen as high-stakes events, but this one was far from typical. Newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney was making his first official visit to the White House to meet President Donald Trump—who had, for months, floated the idea of making Canada the 51st state.
It didn’t take long for a reporter to raise the topic on everyone’s mind. Trump reaffirmed his interest in annexation, calling the U.S.-Canada border nothing more than an arbitrary line.
Carney, whose election was driven in part by backlash against Trump’s combative rhetoric, now had the opportunity to stand up for his country. He responded with calm resolve.
“Some places are simply not for sale,” Carney said. Canada, he added, is one of them—“and it never will be.”
Trump gave a casual shrug and lifted his eyebrows. “Never say never,” he replied.
Carney silently mouthed the words: “never, never, never.”
The exchange highlighted how Trump has reshaped meetings in the Oval Office—transforming what were once routine diplomatic encounters into tense moments that challenge visiting leaders to either confront or accommodate the unpredictable American president. His style appeals to some supporters, but often unnerves diplomats more accustomed to measured, deliberate diplomacy. “There’s no set playbook for handling this,” said Daniel Mulhall, who served as Ireland’s ambassador to the U.S. during Trump’s first term. He described the former president’s erratic behavior as a “risk factor” and a “remarkable break from the norm.”
Still, it seemed that Carney struck the right tone — at least in Trump’s view. As the meeting wrapped up, Trump remarked, “I like this guy.”
Carney smiled in response.
Trump Has Changed the Game
Traditionally, an Oval Office meeting has symbolized the pinnacle of diplomatic recognition — formal, dignified, and largely uneventful. Reporters were allowed in briefly to snap photos and, occasionally, ask a few questions while leaders offered scripted comments.
That model no longer applies. Under Trump, these meetings resemble episodes from a geopolitical reality show. He can be hospitable one moment and scathingly critical the next, often airing grievances about trade, military contributions, or perceived slights. He welcomes extended press questioning, often turning visiting leaders into passive observers.
Since his return to office, Trump has hosted 16 foreign leaders at the White House — more than Barack Obama or Joe Biden had at this point in their presidencies.
“Thanks to this president’s dedication to transparency and accessibility, Americans can see his foreign policy play out live — giving both him and visiting leaders a direct channel to the public,” said Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly.
In practice, these sessions can feel like stress tests. On Tuesday, Carney sat through Trump’s tirade about California’s delayed high-speed rail project, boasts about refurbishing the Oval Office with “great love and 24-karat gold,” and a surprise declaration that the U.S. would cease airstrikes on the Houthis in Yemen.
Trump even launched into an unexpected rant about Barack Obama’s presidential library, claiming delays were due to the former president insisting on hiring only “woke” workers.
“He wanted to be politically correct,” Trump said. “He didn’t use strong, tough, mean construction workers.”
Carney’s discomfort showed — his mouth tightened, his eyes darted, and his hands stayed clasped, except for the occasional attempt to interject.
By contrast, El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele appeared more relaxed during his meeting with Trump, smiling as the president bragged about scoring high on a cognitive test, insulted a reporter’s ratings, and described himself as “very flexible” on tariffs.
Elise Labott, a veteran journalist and Council on Foreign Relations fellow, dismissed the White House’s framing of these encounters as transparent diplomacy. “It’s just more of the show,” she said. “These meetings have been turned into part of the circus.”
Leaders Choose Tact Over Confrontation
Foreign leaders often tread carefully to avoid direct confrontation. Instead, they pivot quickly when uncomfortable topics come up.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, for example, was in the Oval Office when Trump floated the idea of annexing Greenland — a territory of Denmark, a NATO ally. Rutte deflected: “I don’t want to bring NATO into that,” then shifted the conversation to Arctic security, telling Trump, “you are totally right.”
Jordan’s King Abdullah II remained visibly uneasy during a meeting in which Trump floated a proposal to expel Palestinians and take over Gaza — a highly sensitive issue for a country hosting over two million Palestinian refugees. The king dodged the subject at the time, expressing his opposition later via social media.
French President Emmanuel Macron stood out as one of the few who corrected Trump without blowback. When Trump falsely claimed that Europe was lending, not donating, aid to Ukraine, Macron gently touched Trump’s forearm and interjected. Trump brushed it off: “If you believe that, it’s OK with me.”
No meeting went worse than Trump’s session with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February. After a heated exchange about resolving the war with Russia, Trump told him bluntly, “It’s going to be very hard to do business like this.”
“You need to show gratitude,” Trump added. “You don’t have the cards.”
As reporters filed out, Trump remarked, “This is going to be great television.”
Trump Keeps Allies Guessing
Rufus Gifford, a former protocol chief under Biden, acknowledged Trump’s uncanny ability to capture attention. “He knows how to draw eyes — that’s undeniable,” Gifford said. “But just because people are watching doesn’t mean it’s good policy.”
Max Bergmann, a former State Department official now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, echoed the concern. “These meetings are inherently difficult because the president can be unpredictable,” he said. “It makes diplomats worldwide think twice about scheduling one.”
Still, avoiding Trump is not easy for U.S. allies.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer prepared extensively for his first Oval Office encounter, knowing how much Trump values personal rapport — and how hard it is to recover once you’re on his bad side. Starmer presented a formal invitation from King Charles III for a state visit and praised Trump for restoring a bust of Winston Churchill to the Oval Office. He also thanked Trump for “shifting the conversation” on Ukraine — even though that shift meant taking a stance closer to Russia than Europe would prefer.
Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin managed to emerge relatively unscathed by choosing a go-with-the-flow strategy. He didn’t challenge Trump’s accusation that Ireland lured U.S. companies with unfair tax practices. Instead, he steered the conversation toward common interests like golf and boxing.
“Every leader has to craft their own approach,” said Mulhall.
May 30, London (Updatix) – As traders awaited important inflation data and evaluated the most recent developments in Washington’s back and forth on tariffs, world equities were on track to reach their highest month since late 2023 on Friday, and the dollar was flirting with its first monthly increase of the year.
Since a U.S. court halted the majority of President Donald Trump’s tariffs then a federal appeals court temporarily reinstated them, markets have been erratic throughout the week as investors attempt to weather a turbulent news flow.
Despite an unexpected decline in German retail sales, European stocks’ initial Friday decline turned into 0.3%–1% gains, while Wall Street futures started to decline once more ahead of the U.S. PCE inflation data that was due later. The dollar, which was up 0.3% on Friday (.DXY), is eerily near to its first positive month of 2025, while MSCI’s main world index (.MIWD00000PUS), which opens a new tab, is up more than 5% this month. /FRX It benefited from a 0.5 basis point increase in benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury yields in European trade, which serve as a stand-in for U.S. borrowing costs. A strong 7-year bond auction and weak economic indicators caused them to decline on Thursday.
Despite being up for the day and still up for the month, oil prices were headed for a second straight weekly decline due to predictions of another OPEC+ supply boost. After its over 2% gain the day before, Japan’s Nikkei (.N225) suffered overnight profit taking. Investors were particularly worried about the impact of tariffs and the amount of Japanese debt. In London, the yen was trading at about 144 to the dollar, up as much as 2% from its low on Thursday. At $1.13 and $1.34, the euro and pound were down 0.3% and 0.1%, respectively. /FRX Due to the removal of U.S. tariffs, Apple suppliers saw a 1.2% decline on Hong Kong’s Hang Seng (.HIS), in Asia. Both the mainland Chinese blue chips (.CSI300) and the new tab had a 0.5% decline, despite their strong monthly advances. In keeping with the main world index, Korean stocks have performed even better, recording their best month since November 2023. In the meantime, an index that tracks emerging market currencies (.MIEM00000CUS) has risen almost 2% for the month. Moreover, it is at its peak since November 2023. Ghana’s cedi has increased by about 40% this month because to the skyrocketing price of gold. “The legal battle adds yet another layer of uncertainty, but Trump’s trade agenda remains alive and kicking,” stated Rodrigo Catril, senior FX analyst at National Australia Bank. “The only thing that looks more certain is more uncertainty,” he stated. The Trump administration claimed that talks with major trading partners were still going on despite the judicial turmoil. In an interview with Fox News, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated that although negotiations with China were “a bit stalled,” he was set to meet with a high-level Japanese team later on Friday in Washington.
HONG KONG— There are many other nations and colleges that are willing to accept overseas students, along with their skills that have contributed to the United States’ position as a global leader in science and technology, if President Donald Trump is not interested in them attending Harvard.
The Trump administration imposed a ban on international enrollment beginning in the 2025–2026 academic year, casting doubt on the future of international students at the oldest, wealthiest, and most prestigious university in the United States.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Harvard was being held responsible for “fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus” after the university declined to provide copious amounts of data about its international students.
Harvard filed a lawsuit against the move, claiming it was illegal, and a federal court in Boston put it on pause for two weeks on Friday. Current international students would be compelled to transfer elsewhere or lose their legal status if the Trump administration wins, and future students would not be allowed to enroll at Harvard.
International students, who frequently pay significantly higher tuition than their American counterparts, are a major source of enrollment for American universities, such as Harvard. Many of them choose to remain in the United States, where they have contributed to significant advancements in strategically significant domains like artificial intelligence, where China, the United States, and other countries are engaged in fierce competition.
Simon Marginson, a professor of higher education at the University of Oxford, told NBC News via email Monday that Trump’s campaign against Harvard is a “treatable policy error” that might jeopardize the United States’ position as a global leader in research and development since World War II.
According to him, a decline in foreign enrollment would hurt American universities’ “talent pipeline” and revenue while helping their rivals in the United States. He predicted that “Western Europe will also gain significantly” and that “China will become much more attractive than before to students and researchers from the Global South.”
In addition to significant financial cuts and attempts to meddle in colleges’ internal affairs, Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric was already causing anxiety among international students attending American universities. The Trump administration has jailed and attempted to deport students due to their pro-Palestinian and other action, while hundreds of students have had their visas revoked.
Over 25% of Harvard’s 25,000+ students are international, and students from more than 140 nations, including the future queen of Belgium, have been affected by the impending ban.
China, which was once the largest supplier of international students in the United States before being surpassed by India last year, accounts for 20% of Harvard’s total number of international students.
Disruptions from the Covid epidemic and rising U.S.-China tensions have caused the number of Chinese students in the U.S. to decline, from over 372,000 in 2019–20 to over 277,000 in the 2023–24 academic year.
The China Initiative, a national security initiative during Trump’s first term that sparked allegations of racial profiling, also turned off Chinese academics. Many of them have relocated to Chinese universities to conduct their study.
Beijing responded to the Harvard ban by claiming that educational collaboration between the United States and China is “mutually beneficial” and will “protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese students and scholars overseas.”
At a routine briefing in Beijing on Friday, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning stated, “China has consistently opposed the politicization of educational exchanges.” “The United States’ actions will only harm its own reputation and credibility abroad.”
Hours after Trump’s Harvard ban, 23-year-old Beijing-born Izzy Shen said her visa application was denied.
According to Shen, whose application had already been stamped as “approved,” “I didn’t expect it to be so fast.”
After Thursday’s injunction hearing, Shen, who was accepted into Harvard’s Master of Design Engineering program, said she was still “relatively optimistic” and that things would “get clearer.”
Due to increasing doubts regarding her enrollment, Duo Yi, who was accepted into Harvard Kennedy School’s doctoral program in public policy, claimed she is currently looking into other choices. She claimed that Trump is “just too unpredictable.” “I am unable to predict the course of his future policies.”
Universities and governments throughout the world are not waiting to court the Harvard students that Trump turned away. Authorities in Hong Kong, China, have called on academic institutions to engage proactively “to attract top talent.”
Hong Kong’s top leader, John Lee, stated on Tuesday that the city’s “doors are wide open” to “any students who face discrimination and unfair treatment in the U.S.”
Four institutions in Hong Kong are listed in the top 100 of U.S. News & World Report’s Best Global institutions Rankings, with Harvard at the top. However, experts claim that since Beijing enacted a national security law in 2020, academic freedom in the 7.5 million-person former British colony has declined.
Harvard undergraduates and postgraduates, along with those who have received confirmed admission offers, are welcome to enroll at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology instead, the university announced on Friday.
With the launch of a $570 million effort this month called “Choose Europe,” Europe has also attempted to entice academics who are concerned about funding cuts and research independence under Trump.
In a speech promoting the program at Paris’ Sorbonne University, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stressed “free and open research” without specifically mentioning Trump.
“Europe will not compromise on its principles as threats arise globally,” she declared. “Europe must continue to be the birthplace of scientific and academic freedom.”
American institutions continue to be the top choice for many Chinese students, according to Alex Zeng, an overseas education consultant based in Guangzhou, a city in southern China, despite worries about the Harvard ban.
The measure might increase US debt by $3.8 trillion and restrict the poor’s access to food and health programs.
Trump tax-cut bill
A significant package that would implement Donald Trump’s tax and spending policies, add trillions of dollars to the US debt, and perhaps deny millions of Americans access to federal safety net programs was passed by Republicans in the House of Representatives on Thursday.
With 215 votes in favor and 214 against, the narrow Republican majority passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act early in the morning along party lines. Weeks of discussions that raised doubts about the GOP’s capacity to reach a consensus on Trump’s main legislative priority in a chamber they control by just three seats came to an end with its passing.
“I praise the Almighty. To put it bluntly, a lot of prayer went into bringing this all together. Following the bill’s passing, House Speaker Mike Johnson stated, “There were a few moments over the last week when it looked like the thing might fall apart.”
Trump applauded the decision and urged the Senate to swiftly approve the legislation. He posted on Truth Social, saying, “This is possibly the most important piece of legislation that will ever be signed in our nation’s history.” “It’s time for our friends in the US Senate to start working and bring this bill to me as soon as possible! Time cannot be wasted.
The plan will fulfill a number of Trump campaign pledges, such as extending corporate and individual tax breaks and repealing Joe Biden’s renewable energy incentives. Additionally, it pays parents $1,000 if they open “Trump accounts” for their children, lowers taxes on gratuities, overtime, and auto loan interest, and increases the deduction for older taxpayers—but only while Trump is in office.
Along with funding new personnel and facilities for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, the law also funds the construction of a wall along the Mexican border.
The Republican Party has authorized new job restrictions and funding cuts for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap) and Medicaid, which offer healthcare to Americans with disabilities and the poor, to help balance its expenses. Millions will not be able to benefit from these improvements, according to analysts.
The Congressional Budget Office, which is impartial, estimates that the bill will cost $3.8 trillion over the next ten years, even with the savings. The House passed it less than a week after Moody’s, a credit rating organization, warned of the US’s high national debt and federal budget deficit and revoked the country’s prestigious triple-A rating.
The package is “deeply unpopular, which is why Republicans made every effort to advance it during the dead of night,” according to House Democratic leaders, who have denounced it as a “tax scam.”
The minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, the whip, Katherine Clark, and the caucus chair, Pete Aguilar, declared, “This battle is just getting started, and House Democrats will keep using every weapon at our disposal to make sure that the GOP Tax Scam is buried deep in the ground, never to rise again.”
Barack Obama also issued a rare critique of the bill. Republicans in Congress are currently working to pass a measure that would jeopardize the health coverage of millions of Americans. The former president stated, “They want to increase costs for working-class families, reduce federal funding for Medicaid, and eliminate tax credits that help more people afford coverage.” To reject the bill, he urged citizens to get in touch with their senators.
There are few options for Democratic lawmakers. Republicans are using the budget reconciliation process to keep the party from facing a filibuster in the Senate because it is in the minority in both chambers.
Disagreements among Republicans themselves are the bill’s largest barrier. Johnson had to make concessions to lawmakers from Democratic-led states who wanted a larger deduction for state and local taxes in the days before the vote (Salt). He also had to appease right-wing members who wanted more cost reductions and moderates who were cautious about making drastic cuts to safety net programs.
With the help of Trump’s Tuesday visit to the Capitol, the speaker seems to have healed those divisions. After some cuts were scrapped, moderates gave up, but MPs who resisted Salt received a larger tax break. Johnson also succeeded in swaying the majority of fiscal conservatives, as seen by the only two senators who opposed the bill—Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Warren Davidson of Ohio—who both pointed to its effect on the deficit.
During the bill’s debate, Massie declared, “This bill is a debt bomb ticking.” “On the Titanic, we won’t be moving deck seats tonight. We’re aiming toward the iceberg and loading coal into the boiler.
Now that the bill is in the Senate, Republicans say they want it on Trump’s desk before the Independence Day holiday on July 4.