I will be citing the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8:4-6, particularly verse 6, by renowned New Testament Michael F. Bird. Bird agrees that v. 6 divides the Shema, the name given to Deuteronomy 6:4, which the Jews recited twice a day, between the Father and the Son. Here’s what that verse says:

“Hear (shema) O Israel! YHWH our God, YHWH is one.”

“Hear O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord (Kyrios heis estin).” LXX

Bird sees, along with a number of NT scholars, this passage as a Christianizing or a Christian form of the Shema. The formulation of 1 Cor. 8:6 leads Bird to believe that Paul and the early Christians were identifying and confessing Jesus as that one YHWH/Lord of the Shema.

With the foregoing in view, I now proceed to the quotes. All emphasis will be mine.

The inference of Jesus’ deity is hardly illegitimate, considering explicit New Testament affirmations about Jesus. In the Gospel of John, Jesus is the “Word” who was “with God,” “was God,” and “became flesh” (John 1.1-2, 14), the divine Son who makes himself “equal with God” (John 5.18), who declares that everyone should “honor the Son just as they honor the Father” (John 5.23), and in his resurrected body is hailed by Thomas as “my Lord and my God” (John 20.28). Looking at the Pauline corpus, Jesus is called “our great God and Savior” (Titus 2.13), and—assuming some grammar—the subject of acclamation as “the Messiah, who is God over ail, forever praised! Amen” (Rom 9.5). We could add to these various Yahweh texts from the Old Testament that are applied to Jesus by Paul (e.g., Deut 6.4 in 1 Cor 8.4-6; Isa 45.23 in Phil 2.9-11) and the nature miracles attributed to Jesus by the Evangelists, where he exhibits theophanic qualities like walking on water (Mark 6.45-53). It is far more likely than not that the New Testament corpus as a whole identifies Jesus as a divine being and ascribes the qualities of divinity to him.¹ (Bird, Jesus Among the Gods: Early Christology in the Greco-Roman World [Baylor University Press, Waco, TX 2022], p. 10)

Fifth, it would be straining some monotheistic sensibilities to include an angelic figure within the shema (Deut 6.5) as Paul does with Jesus Christ (1 Cor 8.6).³⁸³ The knowledge of the one God over and against idols and in distinction to the many gods and lords (1 Cor 8.1-5) includes the priority of “one God, the Father” as Creator along with “one Lord, Jesus Christ” as demiurge and deliverer (1 Cor 8.6). Importantly, Jesus is not a second god beside or below God the Father, but God’s oneness (eis) is predicated of him as well as the exclusivity of Israel’s devotion to the one God from the shema. In addition, this oneness operates only in the context of a God-Jesus unity as they are “for us.”³⁸⁴ Angels do not have a part in monotheistic confession, its exclusive devotion, and a mode of deliverance that puts the delivered in a relationship with them! Tilling’s conclusion is apt: “There is no angel or intermediary being of any kind in any text that parallels the way Paul speaks of this Christ-relation. Rather the way Paul describes the relation between Christ and Christians is analogous only to the relation between Israel and YHWH.”³⁸⁵

³⁸³ Here I disagree with McGrath (Only True God, 39-44) that Paul includes Jesus alongside God as a deputy rather than beside God as an equal in the shema. Paul, like Philo (Her. 166; Plant. 86; Somn. 163; Abr. 121, 124; Mos. 2.99-100; Spec. leg. 1.30, 307), splits the Creative and executive functions of Israel’s one God, in Paul’s case, between God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul, it appears, can seamlessly relate Jesus Christ to God in terms of “subordination, coordination, and belonging” while declaring that Christ’s “origin and essential being … belongs entirely on the side of God” (Udo Schnelle, Apostle Paul: His Life and Theology [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005], 396-97). For Feldmeier and Spieckermann (God Becoming Human, 252): “With regard to Christ this means that precisely by submitting himself freely to the Father and letting God alone be God, he becomes completely one with the Father as the Son. This is why dominance and subordination are inadequate terms for the relationship between Father and Son. The relationship is determined by reciprocal sharing; and this is a biblical legacy.” (Ibid., pp. 261-262)

(a) In 1 Cor 16.22 we have a continuation of the pattern of Jesus devotion exhibited across the letter. The monotheistic confession of Deut 6.4, pertaining to Israel’s one God and one Lord, was split by Paul in 1 Cor 8.6 to include one God the Father and the one Lord Jesus Christ. Then, in 1 Cor 16.22, the command to love God in Deut 6.5 is applied by Paul to the Lord Jesus. Such love has the character of covenant loyalty, and the absence of such love puts one under a covenant curse. Paul binds Jesus to Israel’s God in a matrix of divine worship (1 Cor 1.2; 11.26; 12.3), divine faithfulness (1 Cor 1.9; 10.13), divine oneness (1 Cor 8.4-5), enduring faith (1 Cor 2.5; 16.13), loving loyalty, and future hope (1 Cor 1.7-8; 12.3; 16.22). Thus, the identity of the Lord Jesus and the type of loyalty that is appropriate for him are determined by Israel’s traditions of monotheistic devotion and obligations of covenantal loyalty to Yahweh.⁶⁹⁴

(b) The application of lordship language to Jesus is made in a “cultic” setting, perhaps eucharistie (1 Cor 11.26; Did. 10.3), calling on Jesus as to a deity, indicating that Jesus is the object of divine worship.⁶⁹⁵ (Ibid., p. 372)

Second, schemes where Jesus is identified with the creative action of God, either as mediator of creation or as cocreator with God the Father, which separate God from creation, signify a distinctly Jewish metric for divinity and denote an intense association of Jesus with Israel’s God.⁸ Theologians like Irenaeus certainly hardened the God/Christ and creation divide, but Irenaeus was not wildly innovating here and was working with earlier texts and traditions from Jewish and Christian corpora. Of course, it is certainly true that not all christological schemes posited Jesus as the mediator of creation. Many Gnostics did not attribute a demiurgical function to Jesus, except perhaps as the curator of the pleroma. The many exaltationist and adoptionist Christologies could see Jesus as a human being promoted to divinity within the created order and make him a deified human. Nonetheless, the identification of Jesus as the mediator of creation is incredibly significant. Greco-Roman philosophers could speak of a divine creator, yet the supreme gods, Zeus and Jupiter were not ordinarily attributed a creative function; they were progeny of the old gods, Kronos and Saturn. The Olympian gods were not creators of the world as much as the most powerful forces permeating the world. While very few intermediary figures were attributed a demiurgical role or a mediating function in creation, it was not unprecedented. Wisdom and angels were sometimes given creative role, as was Plato’s demiurge with the young gods and Philo’s Logos. Even the Babylonian deity Marduk is among divine beings who create. Yet even these creator-gods and demiurgical figures are themselves created beings, and that is the difference. To attribute a creative function to Christ would not itself make him species unique or require his promotion within a divine hierarchy. However, when Christ is considered eternal, placed above angels and powers, and attributed a creative function, that is the telling point. Thus, when the early Christians confessed Jesus as the one by or through whom ‘all things’ were made (1 Cor 8.6; Col 1.15-18; Heb 1.2; Odes Sol. 16.19; John 1.3; Rev 3.14; Keryg. Pet. 2; Herm. 3.4; 91.5; Diogn. 7.2; Justin, 1 Apol. 6.3; Irenaeus, Haer. 4.11.1), with absolute preexistence and EVEN ETERNALITY (John 1.1-2; 17.5; Pol. Phil. 14.3; Diogn. 11.5), and differentiated him from and above intermediary figures (1 Clem. 36.2; Mart. Pol. 14.1; Herm. 59.2; Ascen. Isa. 4.14; 9.28; Irenaeus, Haer. 1.22.1; 3.11.1-2; 4.7.4; 5.18.1; Epid. 10; 40; 94; Gos. Pet. 39-40; Athenagoras Leg. 10.2, 5; 24.2; Diogn. 7.2-4; Justin, 1 Apol. 52.3; Tertullian, Carne 14.1-2; 6.3; Ps.-Clem. Rec. 1.45; 2.42; Hom. 18.4; Origen Cels. 5.4-5), they were placing him ON THE SIDE OF THE UNCREATED CREATING GOD in distinction from created creator-deities and their creation.

Again, what is telling is that this is all being said within the auspices of scripturally rooted monotheism. As early as Paul ( 1 Cor 8.6) we see that Christ as a creator-deity does not threaten the divinity of God the Father, as if Christ were a rival and rebellious sub-deity; in fact, the language from Deut 6.4 shows that Christ shares more of the Father’s divine identity AS AN UNCREATED CREATOR.⁹ In addition, the opening stichs of the Johannine prologue depict the Logos as the Creative instrument of the one, true, uncreated Creator, and presages the Logos’ participation in God’s own being (John 1.1-3). Now, as I have stated, some intermediary figures could have relative preexistence and a Creative mediating function attributed to them (e.g., Wisdom, Philo’s Logos, sometimes angels), but it is only with Jesus that we find absolute preexistence, eternality, and a creative mediating function.¹⁰ Jesus’ eternality and his role as mediator of creation implied that he was AN “UNCREATED” God, and that is what makes representations of Jesus stand out among creator-deities and other intermediary figures who pull levers in the Creative work. In the words of Buhner, “the notion of any kind of participation in creation or a Creative mediation cannot be proven for any eschatological salvation figure independent of the early Jesus movement,”¹¹ and “the specifically Johannine conception of Christ’s preexistence actually serves the purpose of describing the Logos, or Christ, as participating in the essence of the one God of Israel and thus attests a divinity that exceeds that of other Jewish mediator figures.”¹²

Third, in addition to resembling the intermediary figures of antiquity, Jesus also resembles the God above the intermediary figures of antiquity. Chris Tilling points out how the Yahweh-Israel relation of Jewish sacred literature mirrors the Christ-believer relation in 1 Corinthians. Also, Jesus, as the “Lord of Glory,” bears a closer resemblance to 1 Enoch’s “Lord of Spirits” than to 1 Enoch’s “Son of Man.”¹³ Or else, in Phil 2.6-11, for all the parallels with Adam, Wisdom, or imperial apotheosis, Paul casts the exalted Jesus in the likeness of Deutero-Isaiah’s kyrios. Now, to be sure, one can find God-language applied to various intermediary figures, 4Q491c and llQMelch are obvious examples, and the Yahoel appears to bear the divine name. However, the application of the title kyrios, not merely as a royal title, but as a representation of the divine name, and a signifier of the superlative sovereignty of Israel’s God, applied to a human figure, is without precise parallel.¹⁴ Even Bousset, who believed that the impetus for applying the title kyrios to Jesus came from Hellenistic ruler cults, recognized that the content of Jesus as kyrios was shaped by Jewish tradition of Yahweh’s exclusive worship: “The spirit of unconquerable and stalwart Old Testament monotheism is transferred to the Kyrios worship and the Kyrios faith!”¹⁵

Mapping parallels between Jesus and intermediary figures, useful as they are, perhaps exposes our bias, as we casually assumed that the cause and comparison of Jesus’ divine status exists from these intermediary figures. But what if we have been looking in the wrong place? What if the most appropriate analogue for Jesus’ divinity is not any single one of the exalted humans or intermediate heavenly powers, but the God who resides above the powers? Is Jesus like the Enochic Lord of Spirits or the Enochic Son of Man? Is Jesus parallel to Wisdom or like the Most High God of the Wisdom of Solomon and Ben Sira? Is Jesus like Yahoel or like the God who sends Yahoel to Abraham? I suspect the answer is, “a bit of both,” but rarely does a study of parallels and comparative intermediaries take into account literary representations of God beside a study of intermediary figures.¹⁶ (Ibid., pp. 385-387; emphasis mine)

These distinctive aspects are, in general, derived from Jewish specificities. The vast majority of distinctive points find their most natural analogue with Jewish messianism and its attribution of superhuman traits to a Messiah and Jewish wisdom traditions with their account of Wisdom or the Logos as plenipotentiary intermediary. Digging down deeper, we could say that only the God of Israel can have a crucified Messiah who is raised and exalted to his right hand. Only the God of Israel can invite a Son to cocreate with him. Only the God of Israel can share his divine name with the messianic lord. Only the God of Israel gives the Spirit to renew Israel, make people alive, raise the dead, and rescue creation. Only the Jewish religion with its account of monotheism and divine agency could transform into an incipient trinitarianism. In other words, Jesus could not be the type of divinity he was considered to be without the Jewish texts and traditions in which his divinity was articulated. There is no pagan version of 1 Cor 8.6. Further, while John 1.1-3 makes perfect sense within Stoicism or within Hellenistic Judaism, John 1.14 and 18 do not without a mutation of monotheism and messianism into the forms that they took in early Christianity.

Let me back up and offer an important qualification. The deity of Jesus is not contingent upon its uniqueness or distinctiveness. We need to avoid the specious reasoning that runs: Jesus shares in a special form or function that only applies to Yahweh, a form or function that has no parallel with Greco-Roman religion, therefore, Jesus is fully divine.²¹ This is not my argument because I have precisely argued that Jesus is similar to Jewish and Greco-Roman intermediaries in many ways and his divinity is no worse for it. Jesus was depicted as divine in various modes in the manifold Christianities from Paul to Arius. The burden of my song is three things: (1) Jesus was often treated as more than an intermediary, closer to an absolute deity, whether as unbegotten and eternal or as a true and living God; (2) there are dissimilarities with intermediary figures, even a distinctiveness in places, largely derived from a Jewish context where Jesus is identified as being under, beside, and united with Israel’s God in extraordinarily intense ways; and (3) early Christology appears to have been resourced from within Jewish tradition and yet also intentionally constructed to resonate with wider Hellenistic traditions. (Ibid., pp. 391-392; emphasis mine)

1 Cor. 8:6: The Christian Shema

HEAR O CHRISTIANS: YHWH JESUS IS ONE!

The Christian Shema: Confessing Jesus as Yahweh God the Son

THE CHRISTIAN SHEMA

JESUS CHRIST: THE ONE LORD OF THE SHEMA

JESUS: THE ONE AND ONLY ADONAY YHWH

The Christianization of the OT Shema

Jesus – The Shema’s One Lord [Part 1]

The Binitarian Nature of the Shema [Part 6]

Paul says there is only one God, and that is the Father, this means that Jesus is not God

JESUS CHRIST: SUPREME OVER ALL CREATION

Early Church Fathers & the Shema

• Uncategorized

Source link

Source link

Source link

How Montessori Encourages Vestibular Development Through Play and Movement

Most parents think about sight, sound, and touch when it comes to their child’s senses. But there’s another one that quietly shapes everything from balance to focus, and that’s the vestibular sense.

For a sense that a lot of people don’t even think about, it’s an important one. It’s what helps your little one stay upright, move around with confidence, and just feel grounded in their little bodies. And of course, Montessori has its own methods for vestibular development.

Montessori doesn’t treat movement as a break from learning. Instead, it builds movement into the learning itself. Let’s talk about how.

What Is the Vestibular Sense?

The vestibular sense is your child’s internal balance system. It lives in the inner ear and helps detect motion, gravity, and the position of the head. This sense tells kids whether they’re moving fast or slow, tilting, spinning, or standing still, even with their eyes closed.

It works hand in hand with two other senses: vision and proprioception (the sense of body awareness). Together, they help your child stay balanced, coordinated, and in control of their movements.

The vestibular system is actually the first sense to develop in the womb. From the moment babies are rocked and swayed in the uterus, this sense starts forming the foundation for balance, posture, and coordination.

Why does this matter in daily life? Because a strong vestibular system supports:

• Movement and coordination: from walking and climbing to catching a ball

• Focus and attention: helping your child sit still and stay alert

• Visual tracking: following a moving object or reading across a page

• Emotional regulation: Using motion to calm or energize the body

Why Is Vestibular Development Important in Early Childhood?

When kids spin, swing, roll, and climb, they’re doing much more than burning off energy. These activities fuel one of the most important systems in early childhood development: the vestibular system.

A strong vestibular foundation supports:

• Gross motor development: It helps kids learn to balance, jump, run, and climb with confidence. These are the skills that let them move through the world independently and safely.

• Learning readiness: The vestibular system plays​ a big role​ іn helping children regulate their attention and stay focused during tasks. When it’s working well, kids are better able​ tо sit still, follow instructions, and process what they see and hear.

• Hand-eye coordination: This system supports visual-motor tasks like writing, catching a ball, or reading from left to right. Smooth movement and visual tracking go hand in hand.

• Emotional regulation: Rhythmic vestibular input, like rocking, swinging, or gentle spinning, can help kids calm down, reset, or re-energize, depending on what they need.

• Prevention of sensory challenges: Well-developed vestibular function helps reduce clumsiness, motion sensitivity, and fear of movement. It also helps kids who tend to fidget or seek constant motion.

Core Montessori Activities That Stimulate the Vestibular System

Montessori environments are built for movement. Children are encouraged to explore freely, which naturally stimulates the vestibular system. These activities aren’t just about fun. They help kids strengthen balance, coordination, and body awareness.

Balance Boards and Beams

Children love testing their balance. And, it doesn’t even matter if it’s a curved wooden board or a narrow walking beam, these tools help develop postural control and stability.

• What it supports: Balance, proprioception, focus.

• Montessori approach: These are available for self-directed play. Kids can use them freely, gaining confidence with each step.

Sensory Swings and Hammocks

Swings offer rhythmic, calming motion or stimulating energy, depending on how they’re used. Montessori spaces may include them in quiet corners or therapy rooms to help kids regulate their energy and emotions.

• Why it matters: Swings help children stay calm and centered.

• Try this at home: The Montessori Balance Buddy offers similar motion in a child-safe design.

• More ideas: Check out our article on the benefits of sensory swings for how and when to use them.

Line Walking and Floor Movement Games

A simple line of tape becomes a tool for deep concentration and control. Children practice walking heel-to-toe along a line, often in silence, with arms stretched out for balance.

• What it teaches: Coordination, body control, and discipline.

• Montessori value: This classic Montessori activity helps children develop internal focus through physical precision.

Spinning, Rocking, and Rolling

Movements like rolling across mats, spinning in place, or rocking on curved boards give strong vestibular input.

• Use with care: A few gentle spins can wake up a sluggish system, but too much can lead to overstimulation.

• Best practice: Alternate directions and keep it short, and make sure to watch how your child reacts

Natural Climbing Structures

Tools like the Pikler Triangle or low climbing ramps offer safe, child-led challenges.

• Why they’re great: Kids explore at their own pace, building strength, coordination, and confidence.

• Montessori fit: These align with the philosophy of trusting the child’s natural drive to move and grow.

Daily Activities That Encourage Vestibular Learning at Home

You don’t need a Montessori classroom to support your child’s vestibular development. Every day, movement around the house (or outside) can offer just as much sensory input.

Try adding these activities to your child’s routine:

• Rocking chairs, swings, or hammocks: Gentle motion calms the nervous system and helps with self-regulation.

• Yoga for kids: Poses like Downward Dog or Horse Pose strengthen balance and encourage body awareness.

• Rolling and wrapping in blankets: Turning into a “burrito” or rolling across a mat builds sensory feedback.

• Jumping: You can let your child try a mini trampoline or just bed-jumping with supervision, it boosts coordination and balance.

• Balance challenges: Walk along a sidewalk curb, create a path of pillows, or tape a line on the floor.

• Dancing or rhythmic games: Music-based movement supports both vestibular and auditory development.

• Try more ideas: Check out our gross motor activities guide for simple at-home ways to get your child moving.

How Montessori Supports Vestibular Needs

It’s quite simple. Montessori environments are thoughtfully prepared to support sensory development, and the vestibular system is no exception.

Here’s how Montessori encourages vestibular growth:

• Freedom of movement allows children to choose how and when they move, which supports natural development.

• Child-sized furniture and tools let kids navigate their world independently, building coordination as they go.

• Integrated gross motor and sensory activities like pouring, sweeping, and walking on lines build balance and focus at the same time.

• Calm, orderly classrooms help children regulate their energy and reset when needed.

• Movement-rich transitions and self-paced physical tasks help kids develop at their own rhythm.

Tips for Parents to Support Vestibular Development

You don’t need special tools​ tо support your child’s vestibular growth, just​ a little intention and awareness​ gо​ a long way.​ At home, you can build routines that encourage safe movement and balance while helping your child stay regulated throughout the day.

Here are a few simple tips:

• Use movement as a transition tool: Give your child time every day to run, climb, spin, or sway. Don’t interrupt unless you really need to, because movement is learning.

• Balance activity types: Alternate active play like jumping or swinging with calming activities like rocking or stretching.

• Watch for overstimulation: If your child seems dizzy, tired, or overwhelmed, take a break. Some children need less input, others need more.

• Use movement as a transition tool: A short dance session or walk can help reset their focus between tasks.

• Provide access to balance tools: This can include balance boards, stepping stones, swings, or even a makeshift obstacle course.

Final Thoughts

Movement isn’t just a way for kids to burn energy. It’s how they grow, learn, and understand their world. In Montessori, we treat movement with care because it builds the foundation for balance, focus, confidence, and calm.

By giving your child the freedom​ tо climb, sway, spin, and explore, you’re not just supporting physical development. You’re helping them feel secure​ іn their body, more aware​ оf their surroundings, and ready for lifelong learning.

• 

  Free Delivery

  Over $80

• 

  Easy Returns

  No questions asked

• 

  Unbeatable Warranty

  1-year ++ warranty

• 
  Secure Checkout

  World’s most secure payment method

Source link

U.S. President Donald Trump said on the 24th (local time) that negotiations on tariffs and trade with South Korea are “pretty close to being finalized.”

According to a joint White House press corps report on the 25th, the previous day, President Trump exchanged questions and answers with reporters aboard Air Force One during his Asia tour, which included Malaysia, Japan, and South Korea. When asked, “Do you expect to finalize negotiations with South Korea during this visit?” he responded this way. He added, “If they have it ready, I’m ready.”

This remark came shortly after a high-ranking Trump administration official stated during an Asia tour-related press briefing call the previous day, “We are very eager to conclude an agreement with South Korea as soon as possible. We want to do it as soon as South Korea is willing to accept the conditions we consider appropriate.”

Kim Yong-beom, presidential chief of staff for policy, and Kim Jung-kwan, Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy, explained after their recent visit to the U.S., “Only one or two key issues remain.” Domestically, there are also concerns that a sudden outflow of investment funds to the U.S. could trigger instability in the foreign exchange and financial markets.

Currently, South Korea and the U.S. are in final negotiations regarding a $350 billion (approximately 500 trillion Korean won) investment package announced in July of last year. The U.S. plans to significantly reduce tariffs on South Korean exports from the existing 25% to 15% on the condition that South Korea firmly fulfills this investment commitment.

Source link

The European Union (EU) has announced it is reviewing all possible measures in response to China’s strengthened export controls on rare earth elements and battery materials.
According to Bloomberg, on the 25th (local time), Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, stated during a keynote speech at the \
President von der Leyen emphasized, \
China announced additional export controls on September 9th for rare earth elements, battery finished products, cathode materials, anode materials, and other core materials for advanced industries. Starting on the 8th of next month, regulations will expand to include high-end lithium-ion batteries and related manufacturing equipment.
The EU immediately initiated emergency responses. Maros Sefcovic, EU Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security, held a two-hour video call with Wang Wentao, Chinese Minister of Commerce, on the 21st, after which he explained, \
President von der Leyen’s warning came just two days after French President Emmanuel Macron urged at the EU summit on the 23rd that the EU should consider activating the Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI)—the \
The ACI, nicknamed the \
유럽연합(EU)이 중국의 희토류·배터리 소재 수출 통제 강화에 맞서 모든 방안을 검토 중이라고 밝혔다.
25일(현지 시각) 블룸버그 통신에 따르면 우르줄라 폰데어라이엔 유럽연합(EU) 집행위원장은 독일 베를린에서 열린 ‘글로벌 대화’ 회의 기조연설에서 “중국의 희토류와 배터리 소재 수출 통제는 유럽 산업에 심각한 리스크를 안긴다”고 말했다.
폰데어라이엔 위원장은 “단기적으로는 중국과 외교적 해법을 모색하고 있지만, 사태가 장기화될 경우 G7(주요 7개국) 등과 공조해 가능한 모든 대응책을 준비하고 있다”며 “필요하다면 모든 수단을 동원할 것”이라고 강조했다.
중국은 이달 9일 희토류·배터리 완제품, 양극재·음극재 등 첨단 산업 핵심 소재 수출에 대해 추가 통제조치를 발표했다. 다음 달 8일부터 고급 리튬이온배터리와 관련 제조장비 등까지 규제를 확대할 방침이다.
EU는 즉각 긴급 대응에 나섰다. 마로시 셰프초비치 EU 무역·경제안보 담당 집행위원은 지난 21일 왕원타오 중국 상무부장과 2시간 화상통화를 가진 뒤 “중국 측을 벨기에로 초청해 해법을 논의하기로 했다”며 “실질적 타협점을 찾겠다”고 설명했다.
폰데어라이엔 위원장의 이번 경고는 에마뉘엘 마크롱 프랑스 대통령이 23일 EU 정상회의에서 중국의 무역 규제가 심해질 경우 EU도 ‘가장 강력한 무역 보복 조치’인 통상위협대응조치(ACI) 발동을 검토해야 한다고 촉구한 지 불과 이틀 만에 나왔다.
ACI는 일명 ‘무역 바주카포’로 불리는 초강경 제재 카드다. 제3국이 EU 회원국을 상대로 통상 위협에 나설 경우 서비스·직접투자·금융시장·공공조달·지식재산권 등 광범위한 분야에 제한 조치를 가하는 제도다. 아직까지 발동된 적은 없지만, 만약 현실화할 경우 양측의 무역전쟁이 한층 격화될 전망이다.



Source link

Breaking: Trump: US-South Korea Negotiations Near Settlement

Source link

Source link

A royal commentator claimed that without Prince Harry, the Duchess of Sussex is “just another person trying to flog their makeup or food”.


Source link