Tariffs: even in the economic war, scenography cannot replace strategy
- Donald Trump takes advantage of his trip to the Super Bowl on the Air Force One to report on the tariffs he is about to implement. In terms of scenography, excellent. The message to the house is “I am calmer than calm; look where we are going... Even Americans can be quiet today and from tomorrow onwards.”
Agidani has realized – or has been told – that the message of this “little pain” that he implied last week was not the most expedient to start a trade war, and has returned more or less to that of 2017: trade wars are very good and are easily won. But without saying so, in case. That’s not what history tells us. Not even his own.
In reality, this attempt to represent calm has to do with the level of pain that, if not Trump himself, those around him have begun to feel over the tariff projects in these three weeks in which they have been in power at least. In fact, it is the pain that the trade war has in common with any other war; not the physical pain, but the economic pain... with everything that can be derived from it. Not shedding blood directly does not make the trade war a game at all.
The response that the announcements have found against Canada, Mexico and China should give the Trump White House some thought. The threat of reprisals has remained open in all cases; and in the case of China, such reprisals have been carried out from the outset. While there is no denial of the possibility of finding solutions through dialogue, those at risk of harm are seen as having to show strength.
And above all, it is in this way that public opinion on the ground is encouraged, almost without exception. The affected business sections are obviously afraid of pain, but the social environment is not conducive to giving up anywhere. The nature of Trump “helps” a lot for this. As time goes by (and you suffer from pain), this will surely change. But the strategic factor is that of public opinion.
As in all wars, it takes strategy, even in the trade war, to act at its disposal. The first fighting shows, for example, that at least China has adjusted its response strategy. That you have been thinking for a long time about the resources, deadlines, levels and intensities that you will use. And disguised as shyness, it’s going to hurt from the first moment, hitting specific sectors or productions. To ask the European Union to do so would, of course, be a dream.
The big question is: does the Trump administration have a strategy? For example, what is the exact purpose of this war that has inflamed, beyond Trump’s usual calamity (“live on our own...”)? Balancing the trade balance? Industrial recovery in the United States? Providing the public coffers and reducing deficits? Cutting China's legs? To ruin Europe?
Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University is interviewed by Yanis Varoufakis on the DiEM25 movement’s YouTube channel. This explains that in international politics the United States of America plays poker, Russia plays chess and the Chinese play Go. The latter was... [+]
Washington, D.C., June 17, 1930. The U.S. Congress passed the Tariff Act. It is also known as the Smoot-Hawley Act because it was promoted by Senator Reed Smoot and Representative Willis Hawley.
The law raised import tax limits for about 900 products by 40% to 60% in order to... [+]
Bandera amerikanoz inguratuta, muga-zergen oldarraldi berria iragarri zion munduari Donald Trumpek apirilaren 2an. Geroztik hamaika astindu jasan dituzte burtsek eta nazioarteko merkataritzak. Baina hau ez da zoro baten boxeorako ringa bakarrik: AEBetako politikan hamarkada... [+]
If that's the fear. Donald Trump seems to have come to occupy Washington’s rounded office for a long time. He has a second mandate, but to his close advisers, confirming that he is not joking, he also mentions his rigid goal of changing some isolated numbers in the Constitution... [+]
