Rejoice! Trump’s tariffs will force Brexit Britain back into the EU

Your great article on the “popularity” of Brexit points out the glaringly obvious (“Number of Britons who think Brexit was right decision hits new low, new YouGov poll shows”, Wednesday 29 January).

But all the while, the government remains fearful of the political backlash if it changes its Brexit position, nothing will change.

What might cause a shift is if President Trump imposed tariffs on the UK along with the EU. That will demonstrate very clearly the weakness of the UK trying to stand alone. This could provide the opening needed to change direction.

This leaves those of us supporting a new agreement in a conundrum. Tariffs could actually be good if we want a renewed relationship with the EU.

Stephen Huyton

Amsterdam, Netherlands

“Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself.” May we remember these lines from America’s cherished poet, Walt Whitman, and congratulate our new ambassador (“Peter Mandelson backtracks on 'ill-judged' Trump criticism after being appointed US ambassador”, Wednesday 29 January).

Duncan Mayor

Huddersfield, West Yorkshire

Fifty million dollars for condoms? (“Trump doubles down on ‘$50m condoms for Gaza’ claim”, Wednesday 29 January). If only Fred Trump had spent a single dollar for one.

Dennis Fitzgerald

Melbourne, Australia

“How much should we really be spending on defence?” asks Sean O'Grady (Tuesday 28 January). Well, this depends on what and who is regarded as a threat to our security.

It certainly cannot be what President Trump seems to think it should be, which, if conceded, will inevitably mean an increase in US sales of weapons to the UK.

Repeating the mantra that the threat to our security comes from the East is wearing thin. It is pure fantasy to think that Russia – a state that is unable to subdue a country around one-thirtieth of its size, a third of its population and a fraction of its GDP – has the capacity to conquer neighbouring countries.

This echoes the same discredited attitude that prevailed among the British elite in the thirties when the Soviet Union was seen to be the imminent threat to Europe when, in fact, it was Nazi Germany.

This is poignant today, with Donald Trump back in the White House and his declaration of war on the world: the threats of high tariffs to subdue other nations and force them to succumb to US interests, his claims to other countries’ lands (the Panama Canal and Greenland), his ethnic cleansing of Gaza plan and his demands for increased expenditure on “defence” by Nato members not to mention his second-hand man, Elon Musk, interference in the internal affairs of other countries, including the UK.

This is a new danger that must be considered seriously in evaluating the risks to our national security. Today, the threat comes not from the East, but from the West.

Fawzi Ibrahim

London NW2

John Rentoul is quite wrong to say “The only way to stop the small boats coming across the Channel would be for Emmanuel Macron to allow the British to return their occupants to France” (“Yvette Cooper has given up trying to stop the boats”, Thursday 30 January).

All refugee agencies say the same thing: create more safe routes. That wasn't even mentioned in Rentoul’s piece.

Martin Heaton

Gatley, Cheshire

Heathrow’s major problems (“What would be the impact of a third runway at Heathrow?”, Wednesday 29 January) could be alleviated by situating the new airstrip in between the two existing ones.

This would mean knocking down and reconstructing some airport buildings and generally reorganising the space, of which there is a vast amount. In fact, there is enough to consider seriously the possibility of positioning the third runway to allow for a fourth in due course.

Peter Rutherford

London NW6

I am looking forward to Boris Johnson keeping his promise to lie down in front of the bulldozers if Heathrow’s third runway goes ahead. Or should I get the pigs fed, watered and ready to fly?

Bob Sampson

Sayers Common, West Sussex

We should be grateful to Rachel Reeves for making clear to us that, with her support for a third Heathrow runway, when the choice is between growing the economy and saving the planet, the economy wins (“There’s another reason Rachel Reeves is so keen to talk about Heathrow”, Thursday 30 January).

It makes me wonder for how long the Labour Party thinks the planet will still be good to live on. Probably until the next election, so that’s okay…

Dennis Leachman

Kingston upon Thames, London