By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

If We Could Turn Back Time

I think this is the second time I’ve used a Cher song in the T-report (must be a guilty pleasure of mine). I also think that some of my colleagues at Academy have some firsthand knowledge of the filming of the video. In any case, as headline after headline hit last night, this is the song that kept popping into my head.

If we could turn back time?

If we went back a few weeks ago and had announced:

• 10% tariffs on every nation (as “reciprocal”) with 90 days to negotiate deals.
• All USMCA compliant goods exempted.
• A variety of important tech exempted.
• Something harsh, but manageable in the interim, with China.
• Complete faith in the independence of the Fed.

How bearish would I have been?

Would recession still be on the table? Possibly, but the “capital R” recession would have seemed unlikely and Depression would not have been something I would have contemplated putting in writing.

Would 20% to 30% down on stocks been my call? Definitely not.

But we didn’t!

Do These Pants Make Me Look Bad?

I think in all human history, the only “correct” answer to this question is NO! The real answer might be yes, but that has rarely helped any relationship. Even, avoiding the question by saying that the pants bring out the color of your eyes, tends to be taken for a no.

This administration has spent the better part of the past month telling every country that they look awful in their outfits! That whatever they had on, was just hideous.

Now, in the car ride to the event, we’ve decided that maybe the outfit wasn’t that bad?

Bessent speaks at 10:00 am today. It seems likely that he might bring up some things the Treasury can do to help the bond market (there is chatter about announcing an operation twist to help support the long end of the yield curve).

We can continue to rally on the back of this new “softer” approach from the administration. Some of the people in the admin seemed to have disappeared from the talk show circuit. There is clearly some “repositioning” of policy.

Maybe as we wrote about this weekend, in Dealpalooza, the admin will back off and make some deals (even if they aren’t particularly effective). More importantly, maybe the admin will pivot to Domestic Production for National Security.

That pivot would be welcome and maybe the self-imposed de-escalation in tariffs is a step in that direction?

I find it difficult to see how this backtracking will help “win” big concessions in trade deals. To me, it confirms, that we over-reached, over-estimated our relative strength and have had to backtrack. That isn’t great for the U.S. negotiating position, at least not for those countries who already felt that the U.S. had miscalculated. Recent actions will only confirm that opinion for those countries.

But maybe it let’s us pivot to something more domestic in nature. Something that isn’t a zero-sum game.

That would be positive and I could embrace this rally further.

It seems plausible to expect more positive headlines today, especially from Bessent.

But, the reality is, I think the U.S. is in a far weaker position globally today, than it was a month or two ago. We, unfortunately, cannot go back in time, and the things that have been said or done, cannot be unsaid (they can be undone, but that isn’t the same).

Had we just started here a month or so ago, markets would be in better shape, and many friendships wouldn’t have been tested the way they were. But we aren’t.

So, I’ll move to cautiously optimistic that the worst is behind us on the policy front.

I’m not sure the damage of what has been done and what is still on the table (I think there are still tariffs in place), has been priced into equities after these recent bounces. The bond market may also have to shift to thinking about deficits again, as those concerns may reach “headline” status again, if everything else calms down.

I do feel bad that I no longer can claim to have any idea of what tariffs are in place, on what, with who, but I suspect some of those in charge of enforcing the policy no longer do either, as it has been “evolving” so rapidly.

Good luck, enjoy the respite, it is okay to be optimistic, but there is some risk that after the shorts are squeezed and reality sinks in, markets turn lower again.

Days after Scott Bessent dazzled JP Morgan with closed-door comments (aka not Main Street) that the tariff standoff with China is unsustainable, the US Treasury Secretary is set to deliver comments on Wednesday at the IIF Global Outlook Forum regarding the state of the global financial system as the Trump administration seeks to tamp down rhetoric over China.

According to a copy of Bessent’s prepared remarks, he is set to tell the IIF that “America First does not mean America Alone,” and that the International Monetary Fund must prioritize economic and financial sustainability. He is calling for IMF and World Bank reforms after “mission creep,” and will say that the Trump administration wants to work with them.

“Going forward, the Trump Administration will leverage U.S. leadership and influence at these institutions and push them to accomplish their important mandates,” Bessent said, adding “The United States will also demand that the management and staff of these institutions be accountable for demonstrating real progress.”

According to a report by the WSJ minutes before Bessent’s speech, the Trump administration “is considering slashing its steep tariffs on Chinese imports—in some cases by more than half—in a bid to de-escalate tensions with Beijing.”

President Trump hasn’t made a final determination, the people said, adding that the discussions remain fluid and several options are on the table.

One senior White House official said the China tariffs were likely to come down to between roughly 50% and 65%. The administration is also considering a tiered approach similar to the one proposed by the House committee on China late last year: 35% levies for items the U.S. deems not a threat to national security, and at least 100% for items deemed as strategic to America’s interest, some of the people said. The bill proposed phasing in those levies over five years. -WSJ

Watch Treasury Secretary Bessent speak live here (due to start at 1000ET):

Bessent’s comments also come after President Donald Trump softened his tone on the unfolding trade war between the world’s two largest economies – to which China’s foreign ministry spokesman, Guo Jiakun replied “our doors are wide open.“

According to Tuesday comments by Trump, “very high” tariffs on Chinese imports will “come down substantially, but it won’t be zero.”

“I think we’re going to live together very happily and ideally work together, so I think it’s going to work out very well,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

Trump notably excluded China from a pause on “reciprocal” tariffs that were extended to other trading partners in order to allow them time to negotiate – blaming China’s retaliatory actions for its exclusion.

The China tariffs include a 125% reciprocal tariff on top of Trump’s original 20% tariff related to the fentanyl trade. Combined with pre-existing Section 301 tariffs, some Chinese goods face levies as high as 245%.

European flash April PMIs were ugly this morning with the Euro-area-wide headline composite measure -0.8 to 50.1, and with weakness concentrated in French and German services activity.

• Euro Area Composite PMI (Apr, Flash): 50.1, consensus 50.2, last 50.9

  • Euro Area Manufacturing PMI (Apr, Flash): 48.7, consensus 47.4, last 48.6

  • Euro Area Services PMI (Apr, Flash): 49.7, consensus 50.5, last 51.0

• France Composite PMI (Apr, Flash): 47.3, consensus 47.8, last 48.0

• Germany Composite PMI (Apr, Flash): 49.7, consensus 50.5, last 51.3.

• UK Composite PMI (Apr, Flash): 48.2,  consensus 50.4, last 51.5.

The manufacturing sector displayed surprising signs of resilience despite the imposition of US tariffs earlier this month (stock of purchases (+0.5pt to 45.6), quantity of purchases (+1.3pt to 47.4), and stock of finished goods (+1.4pt to 47.8) all improved). The details of the manufacturing print and commentary provided in the press release suggest that activity in the sector was likely supported by front-loading (possibly reflecting strategic shipments during the 90-day pause on the country-specific component of the US reciprocal tariffs) and restocking.

However, there was a clear drop-off in the forward-looking business expectations measures.

The responses for today’s flash PMI reports were collected between the 9th and 22nd of April, implying that the majority of the responses should reflect both the reciprocal tariff announcement and implementation of 10% baseline and critical industry tariffs, as well as the 90-day reciprocal tariff delay on April 9th.

In the US, expectations were for weakness in both Services and Manufacturing surveys, following a slew of dismal ‘soft’ data from Regional Fed surveys.

However, reflecting similar trajectories to Europe, US Manufacturing PMI beat expectations, rising to 50.7 from 50.2 (better than the 49.0 contraction expected) while Services disappointed, dropping from 54.4 to 51.4 (below the 52.6 expected)…

The tariff front-running that was seen in Europe appears to have been echoed in the US Manufacturing sector.

However, just as in Europe, forward-looking expectations for output tumbled… The latest reading was the joint-second lowest since September 2020, surpassed only by October 2022.

Commenting on the flash PMI data, Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence said:

“The early flash PMI data for April point to a marked slowing of business activity growth at the start of the second quarter, accompanied by a slump in optimism about the outlook. At the same time, price pressures intensified, creating a headache for a central bank which is coming under increasing pressure to shore up a weakening economy just as inflation looks set to rise. 

“Output rose in April at its slowest pace since December 2023, indicating that the US economy is growing at a modest annualized rate of just 1.0%. Manufacturing is broadly stagnating as any beneficial effect of tariffs are offset by heightened economic uncertainty, supply chain concerns and falling exports, while the services economy is slowing amid weakened demand growth, notably in terms of exports such as travel and tourism. 

“Confidence about business conditions in the year ahead has meanwhile deteriorated sharply, worsening among manufacturers and service providers alike, largely thanks to growing concerns about the impact of recent government policy announcements.

“Tariffs are meanwhile being cited as the key cause of higher prices, though labor costs are also reportedly continuing to rise, causing companies to hike their selling prices at a pace not seen for over a year. In manufacturing, the rate of price increase is the steepest for nearly two-and-a-half years. These higher prices will inevitably feed through to higher consumer inflation, potentially limiting the scope for the Federal Reserve to reduce interest rates at a time when a slowing economy looks in need of a boost.”

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to provide laid-off federal probationary employees with a written notice stating that they were not terminated for performance reasons but that it was part of a government-wide termination effort.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup also ordered Acting Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Charles Ezell not to tell agencies to terminate “any federal employee or group of federal employees.”

The judge wrote on April 18 that the firings of probationary workers followed an OPM template that states they were fired for job performance reasons.

“Termination under the false pretense of performance is an injury that will persist for the working life of each civil servant,” wrote Alsup, who is based in San Francisco. “The stain created by OPM’s pretense will follow each employee through their careers and will limit their professional opportunities.”

The latest directive from the judge is part of a lawsuit that was filed by labor unions and nonprofits contesting the mass firings of thousands of probationary workers in February under President Donald Trump.

Probationary workers are typically new hires or employees who were recently promoted and who must serve a trial period of one to two years before they receive full-term, or permanent, employment.

“If a particular termination was in fact carried out after an individualized evaluation of that employee’s performance or fitness, the Chief Human Capital Officer (or equivalent) of that agency may instead submit … a declaration, under oath and seal, stating so and providing the individual reasoning underpinning that termination,” Alsup also wrote, setting a May 8 deadline to do so.

On April 8, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked an earlier order from Alsup that required the administration to return to work some of the terminated probationary federal employees who were terminated. The justices were responding to the Trump administration’s emergency appeal of Alsup’s ruling

The court’s order involved a technical legal assessment of the right, or standing, of several nonprofit associations to sue over the firings. Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who dissented, said they would have kept the judge’s order in place.

The groups who filed the lawsuit argued that the Trump administration violated the Constitution’s separation of powers clause and that OPM had lacked “the constitutional, statutory, or regulatory authority to order federal agencies to terminate employees in this fashion that Congress has authorized those agencies to hire and manage.”

“Notwithstanding this lack of legal authority, OPM ordered federal agencies throughout the nation, including in this District, to wipe out their ranks of probationary employees without any regard to applicable statutes,” said their complaint, filed in February.

The Trump administration lawyers, in their emergency petition to the Supreme Court, said that the district judge had acted unconstitutionally.

The judge’s “extraordinary reinstatement order violates the separation of powers, arrogating to a single district court the Executive Branch’s powers of personnel management on the flimsiest of grounds and the hastiest of timelines,“ lawyers for the government wrote. ”That is no way to run a government.”

Separately, a federal judge in Maryland overseeing a similar lawsuit brought by 19 states ruled that the Trump administration did not follow laws regarding mass terminations of federal employees.

That order was overturned this past week by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Authored by Dave Huber via The College Fix,

Making the rounds this past week were comments by a Mexican archeologist regarding the discovery of a Mayan altar at which child sacrifices were performed.

As reported by CBS News, the altar, found in Tikal National Park, showed “the remains of three children not older than 4 years,” according to the scholar who led the discovery team.

The savagery of how such sacrifices were performed, however, is not brought up. Instead, we merely read how Tikal was “a cosmopolitan center,” a “center of cultural convergence,” and how the altar had a “figure representing the Storm Goddess.”

CBS also managed to get a comment from an archeologist not affiliated with the findings at Tikal. How come? Probably because María Belén Méndez of the National Autonomous University of Mexico said the child sacrifices were merely “a practice.”

“It’s not that [its practitioners] were violent,” Belén Méndez said, just that sacrifices were “their way of connecting with the celestial bodies.”

As Reason Senior Editor (and former College Fix contributor) Robby Soave put it, “mostly peaceful child sacrifice”?

Now, imagine CBS News finding some deep-woods gentleman in, say, Middle-Of-Nowhere Arkansas. He’s holding several individuals captive on his property and forcing them to work for him and tend to his land:

Professor Antoinette Whitebread told CBS News it’s not that this man was practicing slavery. It was just his way of connecting with the Bible. After all, in Leviticus and Joshua we read “Moses tells the Israelites on the way to the Promised Land how they should acquire and keep slaves,” and that “some of you shall always be slaves.”

In the the New Testament, Ephesians notes that Paul said “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling.”

We have to imagine this as of course CBS would never run such a segment — because it’s ridiculous. The West long ago rejected such justifications (if they ever really existed in the first place), and there’s no way CBS or other news outlets would treat this hypothetical without referencing the inherent barbarity.

Oppression studies dictates that Western values, culture, and even science aren’t any better than others’, and since they’ve been the (positive) focus for so long, the focus must now shift elsewhere — but only with favorable narratives.

New Zealand, for example, tells us “indigenous ways of knowing” are on par with modern Western science methods. The University of Massachusetts Amherst got a $30 million federal grant in 2023 to “braid” indigenous knowledge into science. And a required nursing class at the University of Alberta teaches about “indigenous ways” of understanding “health … and being one with nature.”

In the meantime, high school and college students are taught that the West’s history of “settler-colonialism” is responsible for just about any conceivable ill. Courses and workshops on “whiteness,” “white supremacy,” “white fragility,” etc. cover all that and then some.

The irony of the CBS story is that 1) the Maya/Teotihuacan never encountered Europeans (their eventual successors, the Aztec, wouldn’t meet Cortez and Co. until 700 years later), and 2) the Maya actually were quite advanced mathematically and scientifically. 

Thus, even on an oppression studies basis, there’s no reason to sugarcoat their heinous practice of human sacrifice.

But whoever said oppression studies and its adherents make any sense?

The ongoing trade war is poised to deliver a negative shock to US growth, prompting the International Monetary Fund to slash its 2025 forecast earlier Tuesday. This gloomier outlook has sharpened our focus on the once high-flying industrial metals market—now showing signs of weakness—particularly the copper market.

Goldman analyst Adam Gillard provided clients with a snapshot of current conditions in the copper market, highlighting tight physical supply in China and continued strength in domestic demand.

However, Gillard cautioned that ongoing global industrial production weakness and declining Chinese exports—driven by the deepening trade war—could tip the market into surplus.

The analyst outlined four micro data points on the copper markets for clients to better gauge sentiment:

1. US cathode imports: YTD imports from BL data 408k MT implying an “over-import” of ~100k MT vs market expectations of ~300k MT (by June). If this run rate continues LME should tighten despite the likely tariff related demand shock.

2. Scrap: US scrap spreads remain under pressure as rising discounts erode the CME premium (US scrap is priced off CMX). March exports unchanged sequentially despite ARB strength; we don’t have April export data yet but this will be key given lower US exports (FY production ~542k MT contained) were key to the bull thesis.

3. Chinese demand: Ostensibly strong; YTD demand +10% due to production strength (from increased smelter capacity), seasonally adjusted stock draws (in part due to tariff related tolling exports) and strong net imports (despite deeply negative SHFE / LME import arb). Think this figure inflated by SMM production numbers (base affect) but a strong number nonetheless.

4. Positioning: Although our CTA model is running close to max short LME net spec at 28k is above the Aug24 low of 16k, and China appear to be still be running long on Shanghai (due to strong domestic demand).

The question remains whether copper bulls like Kostas Bintas, Trafigura Group’s former co-head of metals and now with Mercuria Energy Group, and/or Carlyle Group’s Jeff Currie (former Goldman boss of commodities) are still bullish on the industrial metal—or if the trade war has delayed their thesis of much higher prices. 

LME Copper…

. . . 

Via Remix News,

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) has hit a historic watermark, and is now the most popular party in Germany for the first time ever, reaching 26 percent. The poll, from Forsa, shows the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in second place with 25 percent.

If the vote were held today, the two parties set to enter government, the Social Democrats (SPD) and the CDU, would not have enough votes to enter government. The SPD is at 15 percent, giving the two parties a combined total of 40 percent. The poll showed that support for the Greens dropped a point to 11 percent and the Left Party also dropped a point to 9 percent.

BREAKING: 🇩🇪The AfD party is now the most popular party in Germany for the first time ever, soaring to 26%.

The main German parties are working to ban the AfD, and a vote on a ban is expected in the coming months in the new Bundestag.

Follow: @RMXnews pic.twitter.com/Czf0gJcNgs

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) April 22, 2025

The news comes at a time when the left is racing to vote on a ban on the AfD in the German parliament, the Bundestag, a topic covered in detail by Remix News. However, despite inital reports that the CDU would back such a ban, the picture is becoming muddier.

For one, there are more and more voices in the CDU and its sister party, the CSU, who are calling for “more calm” towards the AfD, including from the influential vice-chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, Jens Spahn. Spahn even said that the AfD should be able to lead some of the committee in the Bundestag, which would give the party more say and power. Given that it received the second-most votes during the German election, it should, like all other parties, have access to these committees, but many want to shut it out completely, especially from intelligence committees.

The issue could lead to a major split in the coalition between the CDU and SPD. SPD Bundestag member Ralf Stegner told Welt his party has “absolutely no sense of humor” on any attempt to go easy on the AfD.

🇩🇪🚨 “Germany needs the AfD”

Young women are increasingly promoting the AfD party on TikTok.

Many of them feel increasingly unsafe in Germany, and they believe AfD is the answer. pic.twitter.com/iXemPYBV0c

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) February 16, 2025

He said any kind of rapprochement would represent a “maximum stress test” for the new coalition govenrment.

“Anyone who wants to form a coalition with the SPD cannot join forces with right-wing radicals. And joining forces also means voting for enemies of democracy,” he said. The MP, known for his left-wing views, instead is calling for a ban on the AfD if the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) classifies the party as “confirmed right-wing extremist.”

“If the Office for the Protection of the Constitution upgrades its classification, then we also have a duty to work towards initiating a ban on the party,” Stegner said.

🇩🇪‼️ Young German woman explains why voters are turning to the AfD

“I’m afraid to travel by train, afraid to go into town, afraid to do anything in public. And they talk about people being afraid of the AfD. The AfD has done nothing to anyone, unlike other people.” pic.twitter.com/hYlQVKXb1Q

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) February 10, 2025

However, Welt reports that CDU is rejecting an “automoatic” approach to banning the AfD.

The CDU/CSU, in turn, rejects this automatic approach: “To derive an obligation to initiate ban proceedings from an upgrade by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution clearly ignores the legal situation,” said Günter Krings, legal policy spokesman for the CDU-CSU parliamentary group. He instead wants to “fight the AfD politically by exposing its extremism…The best recipe against the AfD is concrete successes by the new federal government, especially in migration, security, and the economy.”

🇩🇪 AfD’s Alice Weidel backs mass deportations in party conference speech.

“I have to tell you quite honestly that if this must be called remigration, then let it be called remigration.” pic.twitter.com/lyB8aOBCv6

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) January 13, 2025

He also claims that initiating proceedings “would only make the AfD rub its hands together and use it as free support for its victim myth.”

Meanwhile, the AfD is slamming calls for a ban. “The renewed call for an AfD ban is completely unfounded and would be completely hopeless,” said Alice Weidel, the co-leader of the AfD. “Instead of engaging in absurd and anti-democratic ban fantasies, Mr. Stegner should be thinking about why his party has been losing voters in droves for years.”

Sahra Wagenknecht, who is the leader of the left-wing BSW, told Welt: “First gigantic electoral fraud, then the ban debate: could it get any more stupid? The fact that such proposals are now coming from the self-proclaimed ‘democratic center,’ of all places, is disgraceful and will further strengthen the AfD.”

She went so far as to say it was a purely autocratic move.

“No question, in an autocracy, the ‘problem’ would be solved in exactly the same way.”

Even in the SPD, there is debate about a ban.

SPD Minister President of Saxony Stephan Weil (SPD) warned a ban could also fail, which would be “a feast for the AfD.”

Read more here…

Iran says that ready to make its nuclear program more transparent at a moment it is preparing to send representatives for a third round of talks with the United States, set for April 26.

Iranian government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani said Tuesday that Tehran in return for this greater transparency wants US-led sanctions lifted.

“We will try to create more transparency and more trust [in the nuclear program] in exchange for lifting sanctions. In other words, in exchange for lifting sanctions — I emphasize, in a way that is effective and has a [positive] effect on people’s lives — Iran is ready to create more trust in its nuclear program and more transparency,” Mohajerani told reporters.

Mohajerani made clear that Tehran is ready to reach “good agreement” with the United States on nuclear issue. “We are confident that reaching a good agreement in a short time while respecting our national interests is realistic,” she said, calling the prior two rounds “good” amid a “constructive” atmosphere.

The day prior to these optimistic remarks, Iran’s Foreign Ministry warned that Israel was seeking to “undermine” the ongoing nuclear talks with Washington, amid reports in Israeli media that leaders are mulling a ‘limited’ attack on the Islamic Republic.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Monday that a “kind of coalition is forming… to undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process” and that the “Zionist regime is at the center of this effort.”

Alluding to reports from last week of an internal US administration split on Iran, Baghaei further warned that hawks in the US are also involved in the effort to sabotage the talks. “Alongside it are a series of warmongering currents in the United States and figures from different factions,” he said.

President Trump has reportedly told the Israelis that no, he will not support preemptive strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and that he prefers to negotiate a solution. Below is what the US side said after last weekend’s second round of talks in Rome: 

“Today, in Rome, over four hours in our second round of talks, we made very good progress in our direct and indirect discussions,” the official said Saturday. “We agreed to meet again next week and are grateful to our Omani partners for facilitating these talks and to our Italian partners for hosting us today.”

Russia too, as an original signatory to the defunct 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal, is getting more deeply involved – reportedly at the invitation of the Trump administration.

The leader of Oman, Sultan Haitham bin Tariq al-Said, visited Moscow on Tuesday where he met with President Vladimir Putin to discuss what’s next.

“Oman has been mediating between Iran and the United States as President Donald Trump seeks an agreement that would curb Iran’s nuclear program, which Washington believes is aimed at developing a nuclear weapon,” writes Reuters.

Fiery exchange between Israeli spox and editor-and-chief of Russia’s RT…

A fiery back-and-forth after we asked Israeli foreign ministry spokesperson if Israel will give up its nuclear weapons if Iran’s nuclear program is dismantled.

“Israel is not a threat to anyone. We don’t have any ambitions in any other country. Iran has ambition in the entire… pic.twitter.com/LlSH3Y3OYD

— Margarita Simonyan (@M_Simonyan) April 22, 2025

“We discussed the progress of negotiations between Iranian and American representatives,” a Kremlin statement said. Moscow and Tehran have been increasingly close, given their recent cooperation on defense, and in places like Ukraine – where Russian forces are heavily reliant on Iran-produced suicide drones.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The latest socio-political and security developments suggest that it relishes being a frontline state…

Estonia catapulted back into international news after it recently seized an alleged vessel from Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet”, to which Russia had a restrained reaction for the pragmatic reasons explained here, but it’s also been stirring up trouble with Russia in other ways too. The aforementioned provocation coincides with the passing of a law allowing Estonia to sink foreign vessels that it deems to pose a national security threat. It’s possible that this could be the next planned regional escalation.

On the security front, Estonia also reportedly wants to deploy some of its troops to Ukraine as part of a peacekeeping mission jointly led by France and the UK. Moreover, there’s always the chance that the UK decides to transform its rotational ~1,000-troop military presence in Estonia into a permanent fixture. That would make it the third NATO member to do so in the region after the US (in Poland and Romania) and Germany (in Lithuania). This could be sold as a hedge against the US withdrawing some of its troops.

Estonia’s internal situation is also becoming increasingly tense as a result of three interconnected developments.

The first concerns the latest law denying local voting rights to foreigners, which includes some of those 22.5% of Russians living in the country who don’t meet the post-independence criteria for citizenship and are thus legally classified as “stateless persons”.

For background, Estonia considers them to be the descendants of “Soviet occupiers”, which is the basis upon which it’s restricted their rights.

Expanding upon the last point about historical perception, Estonia is also ramping up its long-running campaign of dismantling Soviet-era World War II monuments, which the state regards symbols of Soviet occupation. 

Russia, however, believes that this move amounts to historical revisionism. In connection with that, readers should be aware that Russia has consistently accused Estonia of glorifying Nazi collaborators, with the most blatant example thereof being the annual marches in honor of the SS.

As if these moves weren’t provocative enough, Estonia just passed a law requiring the Estonian Chrisitan Orthodox Church to sever its canonical ties with the Russian Orthodox Church. 

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharov reacted to this by denouncing “the systematic destruction of fundamental human rights and freedoms continues under the guise of far-fetched, so-called democratic slogans. Once again, a blow has been dealt to one of the most sensitive areas – religious rights and freedoms.”

Estonia is able to threaten Russia’s direct and indirect interests, correspondingly relating to its national security and the rights of its co-ethnics in that country, with impunity due to its NATO membership. The only realistic scenarios in which Russia might countenance using military force are if Estonia participates in blockading the Gulf of Finland, uses force against Russian vessels (whether a warship or Russian-flagged civilian ship), or attacks across the “Baltic Defence Line” that it’s building along their border.

So long as Estonia keeps its provocations below these thresholds, then the risk of a major war breaking out should remain low, but bilateral tensions will worsen as will those between Russia and the European members of NATO. That could turn Estonia into Europe’s next trouble spot, thus accelerating the militarization of the Baltic Sea and the nearby Arctic region, likely including the Russian-Finnish border. Russian-EU tensions would then persist indefinitely even if Russian-US relations improve in the future.

The last time Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky was in the same room with US President Donald Trump, it didn’t go so well. That was scene of the February 28 fireworks in Oval Office (see below), also involving Vice President JD Vance. Since then, US-Ukraine relations have been very strained, and Trump had even briefly halted the flow of weapons to Ukrainian forces.

Zelensky would like to try again, at a moment he’s not happy the US and Russia are engaged in ongoing bilateral talks with the purpose of diplomatic normalization and achieving resolution to the Ukraine war. Zelensky on Tuesday made clear that he would like to meet Trump in the Vatican on Saturday where global leaders will attend the funeral of Pope Francis, who died in the early hours of Monday.

“Yes, I would like to, I am ready. We are always ready to meet with our partners from the United States,” Zelensky said in answering a journalist’s question on whether he hopes to meet Trump and the funeral ceremonies.

And a Vatican statement has indicated the two leaders are likely to sit near each other, up at the front of the proceedings.

“We expect the world leaders coming for the papal funeral, including U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, will be seated in the front row or towards the front of the funeral in St. Peter’s Square on Saturday morning. We might see some images of the world leaders greeting each other. The ceremony will be solemn,” it stated.

Trump just before this last weekend warned he’s ready to walk away from efforts to forge a peace deal if progress is not quickly made, and that’s when Putin unveiled his 30-hour Easter truce.

This week much discussion has reportedly focused on Crimea, with the US being open to giving formal recognition of Russia’s hold over the peninsula. But this has been another source of tension, as Zelensky has already rejected this.

If Trump and Zelensky do meet, it could be just brief and informal, or else they could set up a meeting on the sidelines while in Rome. According to more details of funeral preparations:

Francis’s coffin — which he previously ordered should be of wood and zinc — will then be taken inside the church and from there to Rome’s papal basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore for burial. 

The funeral date was set by cardinals meeting in a so-called “general congregation”, the first of a series of meetings which will culminate in a conclave within three weeks, where a new pope will be elected.

Francis died in the Casa Santa Marta, the Vatican residence where he lived during his 12-year papacy, and his body was laid out in its chapel on Monday evening.

The Pope during his pontificate frequently called for peace in Ukraine, but he also at times lashed out at the West and the arms industry for fueling the bloodshed.

Not very long ago, in late February, this scene played out at the White House…

Wow.

Vance and Trump went in on Zelensky and it was deserved. pic.twitter.com/dnAsRDIqWf

— Wendy O (@CryptoWendyO) February 28, 2025

At the moment, at least 99.5% of Kursk territory is back in Russia’s control. Russia’s military also still continues to advance in remaining parts of Donetsk still held by Ukraine, but slowly and village by village.