LONDON — The BBC should stand firm against Donald Trump’s multi-billion dollar defamation lawsuit, a U.K. minister said Tuesday, after the U.S. president filed his heavily-trailed legal action against the British public broadcaster. Stephen Kinnock said the BBC is “right to stick by their guns” that there is no legal case to answer over the controversial editing of a speech the U.S. president gave on Jan. 6, 2021, as the U.S. Capitol riot was getting underway. “I think they have apologized for one or two of the mistakes that were made in that Panorama program, but they’ve also been very clear that there is no case to answer in terms of Mr. Trump’s accusations on the broader point about libel or defamation,” the health minister told Sky News. And he said of the BBC: “I think the broader argument that they were making — they are right to stick by their guns on that. And I hope that they will continue to do so as an independent organization, of course, funded by the license fee — a hugely important institution.” The lawsuit, filed in Miami on Monday, complains that the BBC “maliciously” spliced together two comments Trump made more than 54 minutes apart in order to convey the impression that he’d urged his supporters to engage in violence as electoral votes were set to be tabulated by the U.S. Congress. The BBC apologized to Trump last month, but argued that the claim from Trump did not provide a basis for a defamation suit. Concerns about how the speech was edited were raised in a leaked internal BBC memo. The BBC’s director general, Tim Davie, and its head of news, Deborah Turness both resigned over the broadcaster’s handling of the case. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is already under some domestic pressure to raise the defamation case directly with the U.S. president. Ed Davey, the centrist Liberal Democrat leader, said Starmer needs to “stand up for the BBC against Trump’s outrageous legal threat and protect licence fee payers from being hit in the pocket.” The BBC is funded through a mandatory annual payment to watch television, and BBC online content, in the U.K. “The Trump administration has clearly set out they want to interfere in our democracy, which includes undermining our national broadcaster. The prime minister needs to make clear this is unacceptable,” Davey said. The BBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

President Donald Trump promised that a wave of emergency tariffs on nearly every nation would restore “fair” trade and jump-start the economy. Eight months later, half of U.S. imports are avoiding those tariffs. “To all of the foreign presidents, prime ministers, kings, queens, ambassadors, and everyone else who will soon be calling to ask for exemptions from these tariffs,” Trump said in April when he rolled out global tariffs based on the United States’ trade deficits with other countries, “I say, terminate your own tariffs, drop your barriers, don’t manipulate your currencies.” But in the time since the president gave that Rose Garden speech announcing the highest tariffs in a century, enormous holes have appeared. Carveouts for specific products, trade deals with major allies and conflicting import duties have let more than half of all imports escape his sweeping emergency tariffs. Some $1.6 trillion in annual imports are subject to the tariffs, while at least $1.7 trillion are excluded, either because they are duty-free or subject to another tariff, according to a POLITICO analysis based on last year’s import data. The exemptions on thousands of goods could undercut Trump’s effort to protect American manufacturing, shrink the trade deficit and raise new revenue to fund his domestic agenda. In September, the White House exempted hundreds of goods, including critical minerals and industrial materials, totaling nearly $280 billion worth of annual imports. Then in November, the administration exempted $252 billion worth of mostly agricultural imports like beef, coffee and bananas, some of which are not widely produced in the U.S. — just after cost-of-living issues became a major talking point out of Democratic electoral victories — on top of the hundreds of other carveouts. “The administration, for most of this year, spent a lot of time saying tariffs are a way to offload taxes onto foreigners,” said Ed Gresser, a former assistant U.S. trade representative under Democratic and Republican administrations, including Trump’s first term, who now works at the Progressive Policy Institute, a D.C.-based think tank. “I think that becomes very hard to continue arguing when you then say, ‘But we are going to get rid of tariffs on coffee and beef, and that will bring prices down.’ … It’s a big retreat in principle.” The Trump administration has argued that higher tariffs would rebalance the United States’ trade deficits with many of its major trading partners, which Trump blames for the “hollowing out” of U.S. manufacturing in what he evoked as a “national emergency.” Before the Supreme Court, the administration is defending the president’s use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to enact the tariffs, and Trump has said that a potential court-ordered end to the emergency tariffs would be “country-threatening.” In an interview with POLITICO on Monday, Trump said he was open to adding even more exemptions to tariffs. He downplayed the existing carveouts as “very small” and “not a big deal,” and said he plans to pair them with tariff increases elsewhere. Responding to POLITICO’s analysis, White House spokesperson Kush Desai said, “The Trump administration is implementing a nuanced and nimble tariff agenda to address our historic trade deficit and safeguard our national security. This agenda has already resulted in trillions in investments to make and hire in America along with over a dozen trade deals with some of America’s most important trade partners.” To date, the majority of exemptions to the “reciprocal” tariffs — the minimum 10 percent levies on most countries — have been for reasons other than new trade deals, according to POLITICO’s analysis. The White House also pushed back against the notion that November’s cuts were made in an effort to reduce food prices, saying that the exemptions were first outlined in the September order. The U.S. granted subsequent blanket exemptions, regardless of the status of countries’ trade negotiations with the Trump administration, after announcing several trade deals. Following the exemptions on agricultural tariffs, Trump announced on Monday a $12 billion relief aid package for farmers hurt by tariffs and rising production costs. The money will come from an Agriculture Department fund, though the president said it was paid for by revenue from tariffs (by law, Congress would need to approve spending the money that tariffs bring in). In addition to the exemptions from Trump’s reciprocal tariffs, more than $300 billion of imports are also exempted as part of trade deals the administration has negotiated in recent months, including with the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan and more recently, Malaysia, Cambodia and Brazil. The deal with Brazil removed a range of products from a cumulative tariff of 50 percent, making two-thirds of imports from the country free from emergency tariffs. For Canadian and Mexican goods, Trump imposed tariffs under a separate emergency justification over fentanyl trafficking and undocumented migrants. But about half of imports from Mexico and nearly 40 percent of those from Canada will not face tariffs because of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement that Trump negotiated in his first term. Last year, importers claimed USMCA exemptions on $405 billion in goods; that value is expected to increase, given that the two countries are facing high tariffs for the first time in several years. The Trump administration has also exempted several products — including autos, steel and aluminum — from the emergency reciprocal tariffs because they already face duties under Section 232 of the U.S. Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The imports covered by those tariffs could total up to $900 billion annually, some of which may also be exempt under USMCA. The White House is considering using the law to justify further tariffs on pharmaceuticals, semiconductors and several other industries. For now, the emergency tariffs remain in place as the Supreme Court weighs whether Trump exceeded his authority in imposing them. In May, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that Trump’s use of emergency authority was unlawful — a decision the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld in August. During oral arguments on Nov. 5, several Supreme Court justices expressed skepticism that the emergency statute authorizes a president to levy tariffs, a power constitutionally assigned to Congress. As the rates of tariffs and their subsequent exemptions are quickly added and amended, businesses are struggling to keep pace, said Sabine Altendorf, an economist with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. “When there’s uncertainty and rapid changes, it makes operations very difficult,” Altendorf said. “Especially for agricultural products where growing times and planting times are involved, it’s very important for market actors to be able to plan ahead.” ABOUT THE DATA Trump’s trade policy is not a straightforward, one-size-fits-all approach, despite the blanket tariffs on most countries of the world. POLITICO used 2024 import data to estimate the value of goods subject to each tariff, accounting for the stacking rules outlined below. Under Trump’s current system, some tariffs can “stack” — meaning a product can face more than one tariff if multiple trade actions apply to it. Section 232 tariffs cover automobiles, automobile parts, products made of steel and aluminum, copper and lumber — and are applied in that order of priority. Section 232 tariffs as a whole then take priority over other emergency tariffs. We applied this stacking priority order to all imports to ensure no double-counting. To calculate the total exclusions, we did not count the value of products containing steel, aluminum and copper, since the tariff would apply only to the known portion of the import’s metal contentand not the total import value of all products containing them. This makes the $1.7 trillion in exclusions a minimum estimate. Goods from Canada and Mexico imported under USMCA face no tariffs. Some of these products fall under a Section 232 category and may be charged applicable tariffs for the non-USMCA portion of the import. To claim exemptions under USMCA, importers must indicate the percentage of the product made or assembled in Canada or Mexico. Because detailed commodity-level data on which imports qualify for USMCA is not available, POLITICO’s analysis estimated the amount that would be excluded from tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports by applying each country’s USMCA-exempt share to its non-Section 232 import value. For instance, 38 percent of Canada’s total imports qualified for USMCA. The non-Section 232 imports from Canada totaled around $320 billion, so we used only $121 billion towards our calculation of total goods excluded from Trump’s emergency tariffs. Exemptions from trade deals included those with the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan, Brazil, Cambodia and Malaysia. They do not include “frameworks” for agreements announced by the administration. Exemptions were calculated in chronological order of when the deals were announced. Imports already exempted in previous orders were not counted again, even if they appeared on subsequent exemption lists.

Russia’s central bank on Friday filed a lawsuit in Moscow against Brussels-based Euroclear, which houses most of the frozen Russian assets that the EU wants to use to finance aid to Ukraine. The court filing comes just days before a high-stakes European Council summit, where EU leaders are expected to press Belgium to unlock billions of euros in Russian assets to underpin a major loan package for Kyiv.   “Due to the unlawful actions of the Euroclear depository that are causing losses to the Bank of Russia, and in light of mechanisms officially under consideration by the European Commission for the direct or indirect use of the Bank of Russia’s assets without its consent, the Bank of Russia is filing a claim in the Moscow Arbitration Court against the Euroclear depository to recover the losses incurred,” the central bank said in a statement. Belgium has opposed the use of sovereign Russian assets over concerns that the country may eventually be required to pay the money back to Moscow on its own. Some €185 billion in frozen Russian assets are under the stewardship of Euroclear, the Brussels-based financial depository, while another €25 billion is scattered across the EU in private bank accounts. With the future of the prospective loan still hanging in the air, EU ambassadors on Thursday handed emergency powers to the European Commission to keep Russian state assets permanently frozen. Such a solution would mean the assets remain blocked until the Kremlin pays post-war reparations to Ukraine, significantly reducing the possibility that pro-Russian countries like Hungary or Slovakia would hand back the frozen funds to Russia. While Russian courts have little power to force the handover of Euroclear’s euro or dollar assets held in Belgium, they do have the power to take retaliatory action against Euroclear balances held in Russian financial institutions. However, in 2024 the European Commission introduced a legal mechanism to compensate Euroclear for losses incurred in Russia due to its compliance with Western sanctions — effectively neutralizing the economic effects of Russia’s retaliation. Euroclear declined to comment.

LONDON — As governments around the world scramble to stay ahead in the frantic world of artificial intelligence, the U.K. is betting big on the next computing breakthrough: quantum. A national research program dating back over a decade has made the U.K. a leader in harnessing the properties of quantum physics to build computers capable of carrying out calculations in a fraction of the time taken by conventional machines. The program has given birth to several leading startups attempting to turn experimental efforts into large-scale, reliable computers that could give their owners an immense economic and national security advantage. Winning that race is a top priority for No. 10 Downing Street, which has identified quantum as one of six frontier technologies crucial to “U.K. security and sovereignty.” In a sign of its importance, Britain’s quantum prowess formed a central plank of the country’s technology partnership with the U.S. U.K. officials pointed to the industry as proof that the deal was not one-sided. Now, the government is preparing to significantly increase support for a small number of the most promising quantum startups, after Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said the U.K. must do “fewer things better.” According to six people familiar with discussions, the government plans to dedicate the bulk of a £670 million commitment for quantum computing to just a handful of startups, with payments tied to reaching certain technical milestones. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is expected to announce the plan early in the new year, two of the people said, though both cautioned that plans remain subject to change. “We are determined to unlock quantum’s benefits for society and the economy,” a spokesperson for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said, noting that the U.K. had backed “one of the largest commitments made to this technology of any government in the world.”  BIGGER BETS The U.K.’s early recognition of quantum’s potential has seen it capture 18 percent of global funding in the sector since 2020, according to a study by the Royal Academy of Engineering.  But there are fears that its lead could slip, with the U.S., China, Canada, Denmark, France and Germany all investing heavily, and some U.K. startups saying they are forced to look abroad to raise enough capital. A $1.1 billion takeover of leading British startup Oxford Ionics by U.S. rival IonQ this summer has only sharpened concerns, although the company plans to retain the U.K. as its R&D hub.  Winning that race is a top priority for No. 10 Downing Street, which has identified quantum as one of six frontier technologies crucial to “U.K. security and sovereignty.” | Mark Kerrison/Getty Images Jakob Mökander, director of science and technology policy at the Tony Blair Institute and co-author of a report warning that the U.K. risked squandering its lead in quantum, said: “Now is the time to make bets on promising startups that can grow into national champions.”  That’s been the key message in discussions between the sector and government officials on next steps, according to the people above.  “It is crunch time for quantum computing in the U.K. right now,” said Sebastian Weidt, founder of Universal Quantum.  Despite being based in the south of England, Weidt said the company has received more support from overseas, including a €67 million contract in Germany. France has also awarded €500 million to just five startups.  In contrast, Weidt said the U.K. has failed to move beyond small grants, arguing it needs to become a better customer of its “sovereign” companies or risk ceding “the great quantum computing foundations the U.K. has built over decades … to foreign players.”  “We need to see now more ambition, and we need to see more pace,” Gerald Mullally, CEO of Oxford Quantum Circuits, said, stressing that the U.K. must “act at a level of scale that is competitive relative to what we’re seeing in other nations.” LESS IS MORE Quantum computing is precisely the type of “critical sector where the U.K. has a global competitive edge” that the government should be getting behind, Ed Bussey, CEO of Oxford Science Enterprises, which backs university spin-outs, said. The industry now expects the government to put money where its mouth is, the people cited above said, with one suggesting a handful of companies could get up to £50 million each under the initiative. Procurement and government investment could also be forthcoming.  In recent weeks, the government committed to “leverage its procurement budgets to drive innovation,” including to “act as an early buyer for the best new technologies to de-risk investment, create demand, and pave the way to market.” As part of a “strategic reset,” the U.K.’s research and development funding agency UKRI will also become more “choiceful” in allocating £7 billion for scale-ups over the next four years to companies in areas where the U.K. has genuine international advantage, its CEO Ian Chapman has said. In a new five-year strategy, the British Business Bank also vowed to increase investment and take on greater risk “to support the most strategically important scale-up companies to stay in the U.K.”

LONDON — The British government is working to give its trade chief new powers to move faster in imposing higher tariffs on imports, as it faces pressure from Brussels and Washington to combat Chinese industrial overcapacity. Under new rules drawn up by British officials, Trade Secretary Peter Kyle will have the power to direct the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA) to launch investigations and give ministers options to set higher duty levels to protect domestic businesses. The trade watchdog will be required to set out the results of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations within a year, better monitor trade distortions and streamline processes for businesses to prompt trade probes. The U.K. is in negotiations with the U.S. and the EU to forge a steel alliance to counter Chinese overcapacity as the bloc works to introduce its own updated safeguards regime. The EU is the U.K.’s largest market and Brussels is creating a new steel protection regime that is set to slash Britain’s tariff-free export quotas and place 50 percent duties on any in excess. The government said its directive to the TRA will align the U.K. with similar powers in the EU and Australia, and follow World Trade Organization rules. It is set out in a Strategic Steer to the watchdog and will be introduced as part of the finance bill due to be wrapped up in the spring. “We are strengthening the U.K.’s system for tackling unfair trade to give our producers and manufacturers — especially SMEs who have less capacity and capability — the backing they need to grow and compete,” Business and Trade Secretary Peter Kyle said in a statement. “By streamlining processes and aligning our framework with international peers, we are ensuring U.K. industry has the tools to protect jobs, attract investment and thrive in a changing global economy,” Kyle added. These moves come after the government said on Wednesday that its Steel Strategy, which plots the future of the industry in Britain and new trade protections for the sector, will be delayed until next year. The Trump administration has been concerned about the U.K.’s steps to counter China’s steel overcapacity and refused to lower further a 25 percent tariff carve-out for Britain’s steel and aluminum exports from the White House’s 50 percent global duties on the metals. Trade Secretary Kyle discussed lowering the Trump administration’s tariffs on U.K. steel with senior U.S. Cabinet members in Washington on Wednesday.  “We are very much on the case of trying to sort out precisely where we land with the EU safeguard,” Trade Minister Chris Bryant told parliament Thursday, after meeting with EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič on Wednesday for negotiations. “We will do everything we can to make sure that we have a strong and prosperous steel sector across the whole of the U.K.,” Bryant said. The TRA has also launched a new public-facing Import Trends Monitor tool to help firms detect surges in imports that could harm their business and provide evidence that could prompt an investigation by the watchdog. “We welcome the government’s strategic steer, which marks a significant milestone in our shared goal to make the U.K.’s trade remedies regime more agile, accessible and assertive, as well as providing greater accountability,” said the TRA’s Co-Chief Executives Jessica Blakely and Carmen Suarez. Sophie Inge and Jon Stone contributed reporting.

BRUSSELS — The EU has struck a political agreement to overhaul the bloc’s foreign direct investment screening rules, the Council of the EU announced on Thursday, in a move to prevent strategic technology and critical infrastructure from falling into the hands of hostile powers. The updated rules — the first major plank of European Commission President’s Ursula von der Leyen’s economic security strategy — would require all EU countries to systematically monitor investments and further harmonize the way those are screened within the bloc. The agreement comes just over a week after Brussels unveiled a new economic security package. Under the new rules, EU countries would be required to screen investments in dual-use items and military equipment; technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum technologies and semiconductors; raw materials; energy, transport and digital infrastructure; and election infrastructure, such as voting systems and databases. As previously reported by POLITICO, foreign entities investing into specific financial services must also be subject to screening by EU capitals. “We achieved a balanced and proportionate framework, focused on the most sensitive technologies and infrastructures, respectful of national prerogatives and efficient for authorities and businesses alike,” said Morten Bødskov, Denmark’s minister for industry, business and financial affairs. It took three round of political talks between the three institutions to seal the update, which was a key priority for the Danish Presidency of the Council of the EU. One contentious question was which technologies and sectors should be subject to mandatory screening. Another was how capitals and the European Commission should coordinate — and who gets the final say — when a deal raises red flags. Despite a request from the European Parliament, the Commission will not get the authority to arbitrate disputes between EU countries on specific investment cases. Screening decisions will remain firmly in the purview of national governments. “We’re making progress. The result of our negotiations clearly strengthens the EU’s security while also making life easier for investors by harmonising the Member States’ screening mechanism,” said the lead lawmaker on the file, French S&D Raphaël Glucksmann. “Yet more remains to be done to ensure that investments bring real added value to the EU, so that our market does not become a playground for foreign companies exploiting our dependence on their technology. The Commission has committed to take an initiative; it must now act quickly,” he said in a statement to POLITICO. This story has been updated.

BRUSSELS — Britain’s top Europe minister defended a decision to keep the U.K. out of the EU’s customs union — despite sounding bullish on a speedy reset of ties with the bloc in the first half of 2026. Speaking to POLITICO in Brussels where he was attending talks with Maroš Šefčovič, the EU trade commissioner, Nick Thomas-Symonds said a non-binding British parliamentary vote on Tuesday on rejoining the tariff-free union — pushed by the Liberal Democrats, but supported by more than a dozen Labour MPs — risked reviving bitter arguments about Brexit. Thomas-Symonds described the gambit by the Lib Dems — which had the backing of one of Labour’s most senior backbenchers, Meg Hillier — as “Brexit Redux.” And he accused Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, of wanting “to go back to the arguments of the past.” The Lib Dems have drawn support from disillusioned Labour voters, partly inspired by the party’s more forthright position on moving closer to the EU. But Thomas-Symonds defended Labour’s manifesto commitment to remain outside the single market and the customs union. “The strategy that I and the government have been pursuing is based on our mandate from the general election of 2024, that we would not go back to freedom of movement, we would not go back to the customs union or the single market,” the British minister for European Union relations said. Thomas-Symonds said this remained a “forward-looking, ruthlessly pragmatic approach” that is “rooted in the challenges that Britain has in the mid 2020s.” He pointed out that post-Brexit Britain outside of the customs union has signed trade deals with India and the United States, demonstrating the “advantages of the negotiating freedoms Britain has outside the EU.” ‘GET ON WITH IT’ Speaking to POLITICO’s Anne McElvoy for the “Politics at Sam and Anne’s” podcast, out on Thursday, Thomas-Symonds was optimistic that a grand “reset” of U.K.-EU relations would progress more quickly in the new year. The two sides are trying to make headway on a host of areas including a youth mobility scheme and easing post-Brexit restrictions on food and drink exports. “I think if you look at the balance of the package and what I’m talking about in terms of the objective on the food and drink agreement, I think you can see a general timetable across this whole package,” he said. Pressed on whether this could happen in the first half of 2026,  the U.K. minister sounded upbeat: “I think the message from both of us to our teams will be to get on with it.”  The Brussels visit comes after talks over Britain’s potential entry into a major EU defense program known as SAFE broke down amid disagreement over how much money the U.K. would pay for access to the loans-for-arms scheme. The program is aimed at re-arming Europe more speedily to face the threat from Russia. Asked if the collapse of those talks showed the U.K. had miscalculated its ability to gain support in a crucial area of re-connection, Thomas-Symonds replied: “We do always impose a very strict value for money. What we would not do is contribute at a level that isn’t in our national interest.” The issued had “not affected the forward momentum in terms of the rest of the negotiation,” he stressed. YOUTH MOBILITY STANDOFF Thomas-Symonds is a close ally of Prime Minister Keir Starmer and has emboldened the under-fire British leader to foreground his pro-Europe credentials. The minister for European relations suggested his own elevation in the British government — he will now attend Cabinet on a permanent basis — was a sign of Starmer’s intent to focus on closer relations with Europe and tap into regret over a post-Brexit loss of business opportunities to the U.K. Fleshing out the details of a “youth mobility” scheme — which would allow young people from the EU and the U.K. to spend time studying, traveling, or working in each other’s countries — has been an insistent demand of EU countries, notably Germany and the Netherlands. Yet progress has foundered over how to prevent the scheme being regarded  as a back-door for immigration to the U.K. — and how exactly any restrictions on numbers might be set and implemented. Speaking to POLITICO, Thomas-Symonds hinted at British impatience to proceed with the program, while stressing: “It has to be capped, time-limited, and  it’ll be a visa-operated scheme. “Those are really important features, but I sometimes think on this you can end up having very dry discussion about the design when actually this is a real opportunity for young Brits and for young Europeans to live, work, study, enjoy other cultures.” The British government is sensitive to the charge that the main beneficiaries of the scheme will be students or better-off youngsters. “I’m actually really excited about this,” Thomas-Symonds said, citing his own working-class background and adding that he would have benefited from a chance to spend time abroad as a young man “And the thing that strikes me as well is making sure this is accessible to people from all different backgrounds,” he said. Details however still appear contentious: The EU’s position remains that the scheme should not be capped but should have a break clause in the event of a surge in numbers. Berlin in particular has been reluctant to accept the Starmer government’s worries that the arrangement might be seen as adding to U.K. immigration figures, arguing that British students who are outside many previous exchange programs would also be net beneficiaries.  Thomas-Symonds did not deny a stand-off, saying: “When there are ongoing talks about particular issues, I very much respect the confidentiality and trust on the ongoing talks.”  Britain’s most senior foreign minister, Yvette Cooper, on Wednesday backed a hard cap on the number of people coming in under a youth mobility scheme. She told POLITICO in a separate interview that such a scheme needs to be “balanced.” “The UK-EU relationship is really important and is being reset, and we’re seeing cooperation around a whole series of different things,” she said. We also, at the same time, need to make sure that issues around migration are always properly managed and controlled.” A U.K. official later clarified that Cooper is keen to see an overall cap on numbers. BOOZY GIFT As negotiations move from the technical to the political level this week, Thomas-Symonds sketched out plans for a fresh Britain-EU summit in Brussels when the time is right. “In terms of the date, I just want to make sure that we have made sufficient progress, to demonstrate that progress in a summit,” Nick Thomas-Symonds said. “I think that the original [post-Brexit] Trade and Cooperation Agreement did not cover services in the way that it should have done,” he added. “We want to move forward on things like mutual recognition of professional qualifications.” Thomas-Symonds, one of the government’s most ardent pro-Europeans, meanwhile told POLITICO he had forged a good relationship with “Maroš” (Šefčovič) – and had even brought him a Christmas present of a bottle of House of Commons whisky. “So there’s no doubt that there is that trajectory of closer U.K.-EU cooperation,” he quipped. Dan Bloom and Esther Webber contributed reporting.

OTTAWA — Canada’s ambassador to the United States and its chief trade negotiator with the Trump administration said she is stepping down in the new year. “I have advised Prime Minister [Mark] Carney that I will be ending my tenure in the United States in the New Year. It has been the greatest privilege of my professional life to have served and represented Canada and Canadians during this critical period in Canada-U.S. relations,” Kirsten Hillman said in her resignation letter posted on X on Tuesday afternoon. Hillman’s departure comes after eight years in Washington, as the Carney government navigates President Donald Trump’s abrupt cancellation of bilateral trade talks in October and prepares for next year’s review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Hillman, a trade lawyer and career diplomat, was a key member of the Canadian negotiating team that faced off against Trump’s first administration during the talks that led to the creation of the USMCA. “While there will never be a perfect time to leave, this is the right time to put a team in place that will see the CUSMA Review through to its conclusion,” she wrote, using the Canadian acronym for the new North American trade pact. Despite the current trade disruptions and the aftermath of navigating the Covid-19 pandemic, Hillman said her greatest accomplishment was working to secure the release of two Canadian men who spent more than 1,000 days arbitrarily imprisoned in China from 2018 to 2021. “In a relationship as deep and complex as ours, pressing and consequential issues arise almost daily,” she wrote. “Yet none was more personal to me than the hundreds of hours I spent with U.S. and Chinese counterparts working for the release of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.”

LONDON — Scandal-hit Japanese tech firm Fujitsu has lost its grip on a lucrative contract to keep running Great Britain’s post-Brexit border with Northern Ireland, following mounting public pressure, two people with knowledge of the bidding process have told POLITICO. The firm at the center of the Post Office scandal — which saw faulty data from Fujitsu’s Horizon software lead to wrongful theft and fraud convictions of hundreds of innocent Post Office workers — had spearheaded a consortium bid for the £370 million contract to continue running the Trader Support Service (TSS), as reported earlier this year. The contract was awarded to another consortium late last month, according to the two people cited above. The 10-day cooling-off period after the contract was awarded ends on Tuesday. The Fujitsu-led consortium, which includes Liz Truss ally Shanker Singham’s firm Competere, has raked in more than £500 million since 2020 developing and operating the platform, which helps firms navigate the complicated post-Brexit customs arrangements between Great Britain and Northern Ireland under the Windsor Framework. While a new supplier will be taking control of TSS, Fujitsu retains the intellectual property rights to a core part of the existing platform, four people with knowledge of the process — including those cited above — confirmed. This means the new system will have to be built from scratch.  All of those cited in this story were granted anonymity to speak freely. There have been calls for Fujitsu to be stripped of its public contracts while sub postmasters affected by the scandal await full compensation. In August, more than 32 MPs and 44 peers wrote to U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, urging him to block the firm from bidding for control of the TSS platform. In October, the government accepted all but one of the recommendations from Wyn Williams’ inquiry into the scandal, published in July, which concluded that at least 13 people may have taken their own lives after being accused of wrongdoing.  There has also been public scrutiny over the running of TSS. Cabinet Office Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds told lawmakers earlier this year he was investigating industry concerns about the service. “We are concerned to hear reports that the Trader Support Service is not providing a good quality of service,” cross-party peers on the Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee wrote in an October report. Meanwhile, a report by the Federation of Small Businesses found current support relating to the Windsor Framework — including the TSS — was “falling short of expectations,” with 78 percent of Northern Irish businesses surveyed rating it as either “very poor” or “poor.” A spokesperson for HMRC, which awarded the contract, said: “We follow government procurement rules when awarding contracts, ensuring value for money for taxpayers. All bids underwent a robust evaluation and assurance process, and we will confirm the award in due course.” Fujitsu and Competere did not respond to requests for comment.

President Donald Trump has entrusted only a handful of his closest advisers to tackle his most important foreign policy priorities from Russia to the Middle East. Even as their portfolio expands – now including a possible strike on Venezuela – the group remains small. It’s a mark of the president’s unyielding belief in his inner circle made up of old friends, family and confidants, and underscores his deep distrust of the broader national security and State Department apparatus that has served as the backbone of foreign relations for decades. The unusually small group includes Trump’s long-time real estate friend Steve Witkoff, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and chief of staff Susie Wiles. It was Witkoff who petitioned Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, to help negotiate an Israel-Hamas peace deal in part because of his role in shaping the Abraham Accords during Trump’s first term, according to a White House official who like others in this story was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy. Witkoff and Kushner, who Trump sees as his best dealmakers, worked together to craft the 28-point peace plan for Ukraine-Russia that was released last month, and ultimately rejected, a second White House official said. Vance and Rubio briefed the Hill as the plan came together, said a third White House official. Trump calls this close coterie on a whim, meetings occur on an ad hoc basis and decisions are made fast, the first White House official said. “It all is just up to the president” on which principal does what, the official added. There’s little hierarchy, other than Trump at the top, and no restrictions on who gets access to the president. “Trump wants peace deals and he wants the credit,” said one former administration official granted anonymity to discuss the dynamic. “The details he’s less worried about.” Still, it has appeared at times that Trump’s team isn’t always on the same page, there has been no breakthrough with Russia, and there is growing fear that a conflict in Venezuela could spiral beyond the administration’s control. “It’s really dangerous to have several people independently conduct a negotiation,” said Richard Haass, the former president of the Council on Foreign Relations who served as a senior adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell in the George W. Bush State Department. With Ukraine over the last several months, Trump has dispatched Witkoff and now Kushner to deal with Russia, after departing special Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg talked to Kyiv. Rubio, and to a lesser extent Vance, have also served as interlocutors with European allies as well as Ukraine and at times Russia. “It’s much better to have one person who’s aware of everything being said to everybody, determines what is said to everybody, and manages the trade offs,” Haass said. With “so many cooks in the kitchen, there’s no way to ensure that what is being said to Ukraine as opposed to what is being said to Europe as opposed to what is being said to Russia fits together.” The Trump administration argues that a smaller team is more nimble and less bureaucracy means fewer leaks. And, most importantly, the small team has the president’s trust. Kushner, for example, was brought on to help discuss peace plans first with Israel and then Ukraine because of his “proven success in negotiating the Abraham Accords and the [Gulf Cooperation Conflict] conflict in the first term,” the first White House official said, noting that Kushner is also friends with Witkoff. “When it came to the Israel-Gaza deal, Steve would call Jared and ask for input,” the official added, mentioning the informal nature of Kushner’s role. “And Jared, who, like Steve, like the president, doesn’t have to do this, has his own businesses and things going on, was willing to help. And I think he’d tell you that the president calls you to help with something like that and asks for your input. You’re not going to say ‘no,’ right?” The set-up has allowed some foreign leaders and diplomats who have strong personal relationships with the president, including those from Israel and Gulf countries, or his top aides a remarkable level of access. But the absence of a traditional National Security Council has left others without reliable access points to the administration. “We’ve been caught by surprise a lot,” said one Washington-based European diplomat. “That’s the nature of Trump. But when you don’t have a line to the White House, it’s harder to get information and also harder to make sure they’re aware of our point of view.” The National Security Council’s communications team merged with the White House press shop this summer, limiting the information that was released from the administration. Hundreds of staffers were also cut this year as were some of the council’s committees. More problematic, to some longtime foreign policy officials in Washington, is the subversion of the NSC’s traditional role of providing the president with a range of views. “One thing the NSC does is convenes the range of stakeholders who say, ‘Have you considered x issue or y risk?’ They don’t want to know about those, it seems,” said one former senior NSC official who served in the last two Democratic administrations. “For example, legal issues on the boat strikes would be hotly debated by NSC-convened meetings and then brought to the president,” the former official said. “The idea that Ukraine would never accept the 28-point plan is something experts would know immediately. They don’t care, since they want to just try to make Ukraine swallow it.” Some longtime diplomats and foreign policy veterans have criticized Witkoff, a businessman with interests in other countries, for his lack of experience and knowledge when dealing with sensitive discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin – but the administration has stood firmly behind his strategy. Witkoff “is a deal maker. He is a businessman like the president. He has been friends with the president for decades, and so he understands his thinking,” the first White House official said. Witkoff, unlike a more traditional emissary with a background in diplomacy, has shown a willingness to outsource policy decisions to allies so long as they’re okay with letting the president take credit. The original 21-point “Trump Gaza peace plan” was authored in large part by Qatar with input from other Arab and Muslim stakeholders, as POLITICO previously reported. And the recent 28-point White House plan for peace between Russia and Ukraine was drawn up by Witkoff and Kremlin aide Kirill Dmitriev in Florida. “No one should be surprised by the chaos that has enveloped the Trump approach to end the war in Ukraine,” said Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO under President Barack Obama. “It’s what happens when there is no real process to develop policy, provide guidance, interact with foreign governments and set a clear direction.” In the White House, it’s largely Rubio, Wiles and Vance who oversee foreign affairs before conferring with Trump. Hegseth also joins some top meetings dealing with the military, the first White House official said. Rubio, who is also national security adviser, spends most of his time at the White House and has regular meetings on world conflicts and Venezuela. He has a close relationship with Vance, who has fielded conversations with the Senate on Ukraine negotiations. Vance has “been involved in the talks and negotiations and briefing the president and briefing congressional members. So he’s been involved pretty extensively throughout this entire process,” the third White House official. “Marco is handling some of the technical negotiations, and the vice president is briefing congressional members, making sure everyone’s aligned on that end,” the official added. Witkoff, meanwhile, leads phone calls with European leaders, a Europe official said.