Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

Project Porcupine. Assessing the fantasy of an EU military surge.

Published

5 minute read

An alliance with a powerful person is never safe.”—Phaedrus

The day after the historic debacle in the Oval Office, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky received yet another round of “whatever-it-takes” assurances from British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in London, and Russia claimed to have shot down three Ukranian drones from its airspace. Russia asserts that Ukraine aimed to hit a key compressor station on the TurkStream pipeline, one of two remaining active gas links between Russia and Europe. If destroyed, Europe would have plunged into a deep energy crisis. The diplomatic response was swift:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov asked his Turkish counterpart, Hakan Fidan, to use all means at his disposal to prevent future attacks and Fidan pledged to do so, the Russian foreign ministry said on its website. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, whose country receives Russian gas through Turkstream, said on Facebook that Lavrov had informed him of the attack by telephone. Szijjarto said the operation of Turkstream was critical to Hungary’s energy security and called on the European Union to uphold guarantees that infrastructure linked to the 27-nation bloc would not come under attack.

Last ties | Sesfa

We warned of this vulnerability in our January Pro Tier presentation, Natural Gas Between Russia and Europe: History, Current Crisis, and Future Prospects (now unlocked for all subscribers here), and the attack underscores the live-wire risk of fighting wars by proxy: proxies can go rogue. This risk intensifies as the proxy realizes the war is lost, a reality that even Zelensky must be grappling with as he ping-pongs from one crisis meeting to the next. Zelensky’s thinly veiled threat that the US would soon “feel” the pain of the war, delivered to the US president for all the world to hear, leaves little doubt about the intended message behind the TurkStream mission.

With the US looking to wash its hands of the war, leaders of the European Union (EU) are gathering tomorrow in Brussels to plot their next move. Coming on the heels of the summit held in London on Sunday, the EU is pushing forward on a historical proposal to replace the financial and military resources previously provided to Ukraine by the US. Not all European capitals are thrilled about it:

The European Union is preparing for a military spending bonanza. But for governments, it’s not only about the cash.

An emergency meeting of EU leaders on Thursday to figure out how to boost Europe’s security, amid United States President Donald Trump’s looming military disengagement from the continent, should be a chance to project a show of unity. But instead, it looks like a power grab is on the cards.

National capitals fear European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will exploit this crisis to extend Brussels’ powers to new areas and strengthen her influence vis-à-vis national governments.

Not wasting this crisis | Getty

The enthusiasm to create a multinational military comes on the heels of von der Leyen’s ambitious plans to reindustrialize the EU and establish a place of prominence in the AI arms race. Among the many problems with this vision, one is determinative: physics. That Europe is a drone attack away from yet another energy emergency is scandalous enough, but it is also testimony to the impossibility of converting platitudes into bombs. Brussels might refuse to acknowledge this fundamental truth, let alone confront it, but it is the sort of problem that cannot be wished away. The numbers are truly shocking.

Subscribe to Doomberg to unlock the rest.

Become a paying subscriber of Doomberg to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Energy

Trump Takes More Action To Get Government Out Of LNG’s Way

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

The Trump administration moved this week to eliminate another Biden-era artificial roadblock to energy infrastructure development which is both unneeded and counterproductive to U.S. energy security.

In April 2023, Biden’s Department of Energy, under the hyper-politicized leadership of Secretary Jennifer Granholm, implemented a new policy requiring LNG projects to begin exports within seven years of receiving federal approval. Granholm somewhat hilariously claimed the policy was aimed at ensuring timely development and aligning with climate goals by preventing indefinite delays in energy projects that could impact emissions targets.

This claim was rendered incredibly specious just 8 months later, when Granholm aligned with then-President Joe Biden’s “pause” in permitting for new LNG projects due to absurd fears such exports might actually create higher emissions than coal-fired power plants. The draft study that served as the basis for the pause was thoroughly debunked within a few months, yet Granholm and the White House steadfastly maintained their ruse for a full year until Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20 and reversed Biden’s order.

Certainly, any company involved in the development of a major LNG export project wants to proceed to first cargoes as expeditiously as possible. After all, the sooner a project starts generating revenues, the more rapid the payout becomes, and the higher the returns on investments. That’s the whole goal of entering this high-growth industry. Just as obviously, unforeseen delays in the development process can lead to big cost overruns that are the bane of any major infrastructure project.

On the other hand, these are highly complex, capital-intensive projects that are subject to all sorts of delay factors. As developers experienced in recent years, disruptions in supply chains caused by factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in major delays and cost overruns in projects in every facet of the economy.

Developers in the LNG industry have argued that this arbitrary timeline was too restrictive, citing these and other factors that can extend beyond seven years. Trump, responding to these concerns and his campaign promises to bolster American energy dominance, moved swiftly to eliminate this requirement. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that the U.S. was set to rescind this policy, freeing LNG projects from the rigid timeline and potentially accelerating their completion.

This policy reversal could signal a broader approach to infrastructure under Trump. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, enacted in 2021, allocated $1.2 trillion to rebuild roads, bridges, broadband and other critical systems, with funds intended to be awarded over five years, though some projects naturally extend beyond that due to construction timelines. The seven-year LNG deadline was a specific energy-related constraint, but Trump’s administration has shown a willingness to pause or redirect Biden-era infrastructure funding more generally. For instance, Trump’s Jan.20 executive order, “Unleashing American Energy,” directed agencies to halt disbursements under the IIJA and IRA pending a 90-day review, raising questions about whether similar time-bound restrictions across infrastructure sectors might also be loosened or eliminated.

Critics argue that scrapping deadlines risks stalling projects indefinitely, undermining the urgency Biden sought to instill in modernizing U.S. infrastructure. Supporters argue that developers already have every profit-motivated incentive to proceed as rapidly as possible and see the elimination of this restriction as a pragmatic adjustment, allowing flexibility for states and private entities to navigate permitting, labor shortages and supply chain issues—challenges that have persisted into 2025.

For example, the $294 billion in unawarded IIJA funds, including $87.2 billion in competitive grants, now fall under Trump’s purview, and his more energy-focused administration could prioritize projects aligned with his energy and economic goals over Biden’s climate and DEI-focused initiatives.

Ultimately, Trump’s decision to end the seven-year LNG deadline exemplifies his intent to reshape infrastructure policy by prioritizing speed, flexibility and industry needs. Whether this extends formally to all U.S. infrastructure projects remains unclear, but seems likely given the Trump White House’s stated objectives and priorities.

This move also clearly aligns with the overall Trump philosophy of getting the government out of the way, allowing the markets to work and freeing the business community to restore American Energy Dominance in the most expeditious way possible.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Continue Reading

Automotive

Auto giant shuts down foreign plants as Trump moves to protect U.S. industry

Published on

MXM logo  MxM News

Quick Hit:

Stellantis is pausing vehicle production at two North American facilities—one in Canada and another in Mexico—following President Donald Trump’s announcement of 25% tariffs on foreign-made cars. The move marks one of the first corporate responses to the administration’s push to bring back American manufacturing.

Key Details:

  • In an email to workers Thursday, Stellantis North America chief Antonio Filosa directly tied the production pause to the new tariffs, writing that the company is “continuing to assess the medium- and long-term effects” but is “temporarily pausing production” at select assembly plants outside the U.S.

  • Production at the Windsor Assembly Plant in Ontario will be paused for two weeks, while the Toluca Assembly Plant in Mexico will be offline for the entire month of April.

  • These plants produce the Chrysler Pacifica minivan, the new Dodge Charger Daytona EV, the Jeep Compass SUV, and the Jeep Wagoneer S EV.

Diving Deeper:

On Wednesday afternoon in the White House Rose Garden, President Trump announced sweeping new tariffs aimed at revitalizing America’s auto manufacturing industry. The 25% tariffs on all imported cars are part of a broader “reciprocal tariffs” strategy, which Trump described as ending decades of globalist trade policies that hollowed out U.S. industry.

Just a day later, Stellantis became the first major automaker to act on the new policy, halting production at two of its international plants. According to an internal email obtained by CNBC, Stellantis North American COO Antonio Filosa said the company is “taking immediate actions” to respond to the tariff policy while continuing to evaluate the broader impact.

“These actions will impact some employees at several of our U.S. powertrain and stamping facilities that support those operations,” Filosa wrote.

The Windsor, Ontario plant, which builds the Chrysler Pacifica and the newly introduced Dodge Charger Daytona EV, will shut down for two weeks. The Toluca facility in Mexico, responsible for the Jeep Compass and Jeep Wagoneer S EV, will suspend operations for the entire month of April.

The move comes as Stellantis continues to face scrutiny for its reliance on low-wage labor in foreign markets. As reported by Breitbart News, the company has spent years shifting production and engineering jobs to countries like Brazil, India, Morocco, and Mexico—often at the expense of American workers. Last year alone, Stellantis cut around 400 U.S.-based engineering positions while ramping up operations overseas.

Meanwhile, General Motors appears to be responding differently. According to Reuters, GM told employees in a webcast Thursday that it will increase production of light-duty trucks at its Fort Wayne, Indiana plant—where it builds the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra. These models are also assembled in Mexico and Canada, but GM’s decision suggests a shift in production to the U.S. could be underway in light of the tariffs.

As Trump’s trade reset takes effect, more automakers are expected to recalibrate their production strategies—potentially signaling a long-awaited shift away from offshoring and toward rebuilding American industry.

Continue Reading

Trending

X