‘Trump intimidating Germany into abandoning Iran deal, stop imports from Russia’

US President Donald Trump is trying to intimidate Germany to sacrifice its economic imports, particularly petroleum, oil and gas, from Russia in favor of the United States, according to American writer and academic James Petras who added that Trump also wants Germany to  join Washington in abandoning  the Iran nuclear agreement.

Professor Petras made the comments in an interview with Press TV while commenting on Trump’s unprecedented tirade against Germany during the NATO summit on Wednesday.

Trump called on NATO allies to commit 4 percent of their GDP to military spending, while the alliance’s European partners are struggling to reach the current target of 2 percent of their annual output.

Trump singled out Germany for criticism over its military spending. He also Germany’s “inappropriate” relationship with Russia.

“Germany is totally controlled by Russia … They will be getting between 60 and 70 percent of their energy from Russia and a new pipeline, and you tell me if that is appropriate because I think it’s not,” Trump said during a meeting with the NATO secretary-general.

Ex-CIA chief blasts Trump’s ‘reckless behavior’

Former CIA Director John Brennan has slammed Donald Trump, calling him “dangerously naive & grossly ignorant.”

Petras said that “no one takes it serious. I think the experts around the world are knowledgeable about Germany – an independent country – having a very successful economy that has grown tremendously over the last five decades, that Germany was formally divided in half and one half was under the Soviet influence, and subsequently Germany has been an independent acting as a bulwark for the European Union.”

“So Germany has become a world power, has become a dominant country in the European Union. It sets the agenda for many of the meetings in the European Union, and it has channeled more of its resources into economic and diplomatic affairs rather than militarism that so dominates US influence.  So I think this statement is correctly viewed as an extreme outburst by President Trump,” the analyst said.

“Now other factors that’s influenced Trump is very eager to promote US exports particularly petroleum, oil and gas. And his attack on Germany is essentially to replace Russia as the principle supplier of Germany despite the fact that it’s cheaper for Germany to get its energy resources piped across the continent rather than to have them shipped from the United States,” he noted.

“So this is partly an attempt by Trump to intimidate Germany to sacrifice its economic imports in favor of the United States. And that also is a very dubious preposition and many of the observers and the businessmen around the world recognize why Germany trades with Russia. It has nothing to do with the domination; it has a lot to do with the cost and benefits,” the commentator stated.

Trump trying to secure more German financing for US aggressions

“Furthermore we can say that the attack on Germany is an attempt by Trump to secure a greater German financing for US military policies and aggressions,” he argued.

“And this is the result of Germany joining with France and Russia in opposing Trump’s boycott and breaking of the nuclear agreement with Iran. So by attacking Germany Trump is trying to break up the possibility that the other four countries that signed the agreement with Iran will be submissive and will not participate with Iran in finding a solution to the sanctions that Washington is imposing on Iran,” Professor Petras said.

“So there’re a lot of implications. There are financial profit issues. There’re military issues. There’re diplomatic issues involved, and Trump is trying to black-check and blackmail Germany and the indications are that Trump’s attacks will mainly unify NATO against Washington, and mainly discredit Washington as an ally, and that is stated in the mass media here who’s very upset that Trump is not building bridges to the Europeans particularly inside the NATO and there is not much support for Trump’s efforts to impose a unilateral policy,” the academic concluded.