After chummy summit in Helsinki, Putin and Trump appear headed for bickering in Buenos Aires

Welcome toTheNational Today newsletter, which takes a closer look at what's happening around some of the day's most notable stories. Sign up hereand it will be delivered directly to your inbox Monday to Friday.

TODAY:

• If Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin do sit down together at the G20 summit in Argentina at the end of the month, they're going to have an awful lot to talk about.
• Prince Charles turns 70 today and he's a frustrated Royal.
• Now that recreational cannabis is legal, employees and their bosses are trying to sort out a host of tricky workplace issues.
• Missed The National last night? Watch it here.

The Cold War heats up

This past weekend in Paris, French authorities did their best to keep Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin apart.

A planned meeting, on the sidelines of the gathering of world leaders to mark the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I, was scrubbed at the request of the hosts apparently due to concerns that it might overshadow the solemn ceremonies.

And the seating arrangements for a working lunch at the lyse Palace were reportedly changed at the last minute to stop the presidents of Russia and the United States from chatting over the meal of chicken, lobster, and potatoes from the former battlefields of the Somme.

In the end, the pair had to settle for a quick grip and grin at the Arc de Triomphe, and a promise to sit down together at the G20 summit in Argentina at the end of the month.

By then, they will have much to discuss.

Like this morning's disclosure from NATO that the Russian military spent three weeks trying to disrupt a massive military exercise in Norway and Finland by jamming GPS signals.

Tensions were already running high between the alliance and their Russian counterparts. There have been several too-close-for-comfort encounters in the skies over the Black Sea in recent weeks, including a near-collision with a U.S. Navy plane Nov. 5, and a late October incident where Canadian jets intercepted a Russian aircraft near Romanian airspace.

There are persistent rumours that Robert Mueller is about to drop a round of indictments connected to his probe of alleged collusion between the Kremlin and Trump's 2016 election campaign. The buzz is that they may target the president's son, Donald Jr., his gadfly advisor Roger Stone, or Jerome Corsi, a former Infowars writer who may or may not have had "prior knowledge" of hacked Hillary Clinton campaign emails.

Although, as Mueller has already charged 26 Russian nationals and three companies in connection with his investigation and elicited only denials from the Kremlin, it doesn't seem likely that Putin is about to cop to any criminal wrongdoing. Even as the Russians have filed a defense in a civil suit brought by the Clinton campaign that characterizes any electoral interference that may possibly have happened as a "military operation," and thereby shielded from foreign legal actions.

There are also issues of global concern, like the unravelling U.S.-Russia treaty on intermediate-range nuclear missiles. Trump has indicated he intends to pull out , and America plans to modernize its own nuclear arsenal with "low yield" bombs that make the Kremlin very uneasy.

All the while, the Cold War shows signs of rapid heating.

A new report issued today by the U.S. National Defense Strategy Commission a non-partisan panel of former national security officials includes some dire warnings about how America might lose a major conflict with Russia or China.

The thesis is that foreign rivals have observed and learned from the U.S. military's struggles to deal with the type of asymmetrical warfare waged by insurgents groups in Afghanistan and Iraq, and will adjust their own tactics to blunt American advantages in troops and weaponry.

The solution, according to the commission, is to devote even more money to defence, despite the fact that the United States is already spending $716 billion US, four times more than China and 10 times more than Russia.

Or that the Kremlin's military budget is falling, down 20 per cent in 2017, with more cuts to come as Putin struggles to meet his promises to improve the quality of life for his citizens.

Should the Nov. 30 meeting happen in Buenos Aires, it will be the first time that Putin and Trump have sat down since their chummy summit in Helsinki in July.

The one where the U.S. president trashed the findings of his own intelligence agencies and suggested that there is no evidence of Russian election interference in 2016.

Perhaps that's the secret to better relations: a willingness to look the other way.

It's not easy being green

It'sPrince Charles'70th birthday today and he's a frustrated man, writes London reporter Thomas Daigle.

In many ways, Prince Charles has always been ahead of his time on environmental issues.

He warned of the dangers of plastic waste in 1970, for example, long before most people considered recycling at home. And according to one anecdote recounted in Robert Jobson's new biography Charles at Seventy, he once got his entire entourage of police officers and aides to return to Balmoral Castle from a long drive through the estate, because he had forgotten to turn off a light.

But by 2009, it sounded like he was giving up hope about his ability to spread his message of conservation.

"The sustainability of the entire harmonious system is collapsing," he said in a speech at St. James' Palace. "In failing the Earth, we are failing humanity."

No wonder he's "so frustrated," as his son Prince Harry points out in a new BBC documentary, when "you've been banging the drum for this long and still no one listens."

Seventy years old today, Charles is inching closer to the throne. He may be hoping to use his power as monarch to promote his environmental concerns.

The Prince of Wales may, however, have to keep his frustrations in check for some time yet. He's celebrating his 70th, but the Queen is only 92 and her mother died at 101.

• READ: The CBCNews.ca feature aboutPrince Charles at 70
• WATCH: Thomas Daigle's story on Prince Charles at 70 tonight on The National on CBC Television and streamed online

• Like this newsletter?Sign upand have it delivered by email.
• You may also like our early-morning newsletter, the Morning Briefstart the day with the news you need in one quick and concise read.Sign up here.

Pot at work

Now that recreational cannabis is legal, employees and their bosses are trying to sort out a host of tricky workplace issues, writes David Common.

A month after the legalization of cannabis, there's still plenty of confusion around what's okay, and what's not especially when you're talking about workplaces.

Most employees understand the principle: don't show up to work impaired, either from alcohol or legal drugs.

The challenge is all around timing.

Cannabis is present in your bloodstream for up to four weeks after consuming, but that doesn't mean you're impaired. The RCMP says there is no reliable test to detect impaired drivers, so imagine the difficulty employers are now facing.

Take the police themselves, for instance. Their "workplace" involves the need for clear-headed, split-second decisions when officers are involved in whole range of situations, from high-speed driving to whether to use force. And the workplace policies on cannabis adopted by different forces vary widely:

• In Calgary, cops can smoke cannabis 24 hours before going on duty.
• Toronto's service says its officers can consume it, but not within 28 days of going on duty.
• Ontario's provincial force is banning its members from ever smoking pot (an approach very likely to be challenged in court).

In a similar move to that of the Toronto police, Canada's two major airlines have ordered their pilots to stay away from cannabis for 28 days before flying. But how would they know if someone is breaking the rules, since there's no test to determine when a person last consumed?

Like a lot of businesses, they're relying on others to speak up when something seems wrong.

This isn't just an issue for police and pilots. In many provinces, if a job is safety-sensitive (anything from working at heights to driving to sales calls), the employer needs to pull the employee off the job if they're impaired.

Meanwhile, rights legislation in many places restricts an employer from firing someone for coming to work high they often have a duty to direct the employee into rehab or counselling.

Many employers are only now realizing this and they're playing catch-up after the green light provided by the government in October for recreational consumption of cannabis. They're rushing to find training on how to handle cannabis-related issues for both themselves and those who work for them.

Then there are the interactions between workers and cannabis-smoking customers. Cabs in Calgary are already smoke-free, so riders shouldn't be hotboxing the taxi with a joint. But drivers are also concerned about being in an enclosed space with those who reek of cannabis. Could that make the driver impaired?

There are lots of questions, few solid answers and lots of potential for problems as employers and employees try to figure all this out with recreational cannabis already being sold legally across Canada.

Watch David Common's story from The National about the problems of pot in the workplace:

Patchwork of policies govern legal weed at the workplace

6 years ago

Duration 4:56

It's been almost one month since marijuana was legalized in Canada, but there are still a lot of questions about how people can consume it.

A few words on ...

A narrow escape from a deadly California fire.

Quote of the moment

"Ultimately, the people have spoken. The people have spoken in big numbers, and they have spoken very clearly."

- Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi reacts to a resounding "No" vote in plebiscite on a potential bid for the 2026 Winter Games, knocking his Olympic dreams for a loop.

What The National is reading

• May accused of betrayal as she unveils Brexit deal (The Times)
• Israeli defence minister resigns over Gaza ceasefire, in blow to Netanyahu (CBC)
• U.S. spending billions to fortify schools, but does it work? (Washington Post)
• Italy budget: Rome rejects European Commission demands (BBC)
• Rohingya gripped by fear as Myanmar repatriation begins (Deutsche Welle)
• Nunavut community says Inuit lives need to be protected over polar bears (CBC)
• Purple bacteria 'batteries' turn sewage into clean energy (Science Daily)
• Man charged for using mobility scooter to tow boat (Sydney Morning Herald)

Today in history

Nov. 14, 1965: Would you let your daughter marry a Rolling Stone?

Larry Zolf asks the question for This Hour has Seven Days, but as Brian Jones and Charlie Watt point out, two families already have. The interview, conducted inside a parked plane as the Stones smoke and eat, is more of a snotty call-and-response pointed question, glib answer. Jones is willing to talk about all "the idiots" in Georgia who called the police on them, but no one bites on the "Rhodesia situation."

From 1965: Would you let your daughter marry a Rolling Stone?

59 years ago

Duration 2:19

Members of the Rolling Stones defend their bad-boy reputation to the CBC's Larry Zolf. Aired on CBC's This Hour Has Seven Days on Nov. 14, 1965.

Sign up hereand have The National Today newsletter delivered directly to your inbox Monday to Friday.

Please send your ideas, news tips, rants, and compliments tothenationaltoday@cbc.ca.