US President Donald Trump’s tariff threats on eight European states, most of which are part of the EU common market, raises the question: can he really target them individually? Technically yes, but in practice — it’s not so simple.When asked the same question, a smiling European Commission spokesman Olof Gill urged reporters to “take a deep breath” before spelling out his explanation.Trump stunned Europe at the weekend when he threatened levies of up to 25 percent on EU members Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden, plus non-members Britain and Norway.But because the European Union functions as a single market with a customs union, Brussels explained, while it might be technically possible for Trump to slap sanctions on each, that could mean bureaucratic hell for US importers.- How does the single market work? -Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden are part of the EU single market with 21 other countries, and a customs union, which allows the free flow of goods from one member state to another.This also means products made in the EU, which could be exported later to the United States, move around the union without their origin being tracked.Because of this free movement, many companies use products made from across the bloc. For example, a car might be assembled in Germany using parts made in Slovakia.This means any restrictions on trade aimed at one of the EU’s 27 countries could in theory be circumvented by moving goods to another member state before exporting them.”Exports of French wine, Dutch cheese and Danish pharmaceuticals from Budapest to the US might suddenly spike,” quipped an EU diplomat — in a nod to the warm ties linking Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the White House.”Let’s see if Trump is going to punish his friend Orban with a tariff,” the diplomat said.The situation is different for Norway and the United Kingdom.Norway is part of the European Economic Area that also includes the EU’s 27 states, but there is one major difference — it is not part of the bloc’s customs union and must fulfil extra border checks.When Britain left the EU, it opted to remain outside the single market.- So then, are individual tariffs feasible? -The above means that the United States would have a hard time trying to figure out where European goods actually come from.”From a customs and operational perspective, it is practically very difficult to attribute goods exclusively to a single member state, given that production and transformation processes are often distributed across the EU,” Gill said.While nothing prevents a third country from demanding more information about national provenance, under EU rules, goods manufactured in the bloc have only to be labelled as “EU origin”.”So to summarise, it is technically possible. It is immensely bureaucratically and procedurally complex to do so,” Gill said.

NATO is facing the biggest crisis in its history over Donald Trump’s Greenland threats, and the time for “flattering” the US leader is over, former alliance chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen told AFP Tuesday.”It’s not only a crisis for NATO, it’s a crisis for the transatlantic community at large, and a challenge to the world order as we have known it since World War Two,” he said in an interview from the World Economic Forum in Davos.”It is the future of NATO and the future of the world order that are at stake.”Rasmussen, a former Danish prime minister who led NATO from 2009 to 2014, urged the alliance’s current head, Mark Rutte, and other European leaders to start taking a tougher line with the US president after he threatened tariffs.”We have to change strategy and conclude that the only thing that Trump respects is force, strength and unity,” Rasmussen said.”That’s exactly what Europe should demonstrate. The time for flattering is over. Enough is enough.”Rasmussen’s comments came as European leaders — including Rutte — brace for meetings with Trump in Davos to try to talk him down.Rasmussen insisted the current crisis swirling around NATO could still be “fixed” and the alliance could emerge stronger in the Arctic region.But, he said, Trump’s actions had already created a “mental break” between Washington and its long-time European allies which benefited Russia and China. “This is a new situation that differs from all other disputes we have seen in the history of NATO,” he said.”If Trump would attack Greenland and take military action against Greenland, that would de facto mean the end of NATO.”- Distracting from Ukraine -Rasmussen, 72, said that the Greenland issue had become a “weapon of mass distraction” for Trump that was drawing attention away from Russia’s war in Ukraine.”Everybody’s now speaking about Greenland, which is not a real threat to North Atlantic security,” he said.”Russia’s attack against Ukraine is the real threat, and attention should not be distracted from this real threat.”The former Danish premier, who led his country from 2001 to 2009, said that there needed to be a “constructive dialogue” now with the United States on Greenland. He said Copenhagen and Washington could update their 1951 agreement governing troop deployments in Greenland, open the territory to US firms for mineral extraction and agree to keep Russia and China out. But there could be no compromise on the fundamental question of ceding territory to Trump. “We can accommodate all his wishes, except one,” Rasmussen said.”Greenland is not for sale and as a real estate expert he should know if an estate is not for sale you can’t purchase it.”