Category Archives: Economic

Britain, Economic, European Union, Government, Politics, Society, United States

EU reset: No time for UK passiveness

EUROPEAN REALIGNMENT

FANATICS of Britain’s departure from the European Union have struggled to quantify the Brexit dividend and what benefits it brought, but when Donald Trump unveiled his schedule of global tariffs they finally had a number to point towards. It was the difference between the 20% levy imposed on all continental exports and the 10% baseline figure payable on British goods.

A week later the gap closed leaving Brexiteers melancholic and dejected when Mr Trump reversed his plans. What the tariff schedules will look like at the end of the 90-day “pause” is no more predictable than any other feature of current US policy. There is no obvious concession from the UK government that might induce Washington to lower its 25% barrier against car exports, and the 10% rate on everything else looks non-negotiable.

Meanwhile, dialogue with the EU about closer cooperation continue apace. The UK hopes to have a framework agreement in place in time for a summit in London in May. The primary focus is security, but that is intended to be a forerunner to closer trade alignment.

As an indication of accelerating rapprochement, Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, has just attended a meeting of EU finance ministers in Warsaw. Plans have been announced for a pan-European defence procurement fund with the UK expressing an interest to be included. There are hurdles still to be overcome but also strong will on both sides to make it happen. It is a measure of how much more constructive diplomacy has become under Labour. No Tory government would have sought such collaboration. Regime change in Westminster made a closer EU-UK relationship possible, then Mr Trump’s rampage of destruction through the norms of transatlantic security and global trade made it urgent.

The Brexit withdrawal treaty and subsequent trade and cooperation agreement were deliberately shaped by Boris Johnson’s government to impede reintegration on any level. Irreversible divergence was the whole point. But, while there is no great appetite in Brussels to revisit the terms of Brexit that damaged British businesses and interests more than the EU, recognition of a mutual strategic interest and a more constructive disposition are necessary. The long-term economic rational is being hampered as the UK continues to operate within red-lines drawn by domestic electoral imperatives.

European leaders fully understand that democratic politicians must defer to public opinion. But with Sir Keir Starmer having earned goodwill through his diplomatic advances, the prime minister’s reluctance to ever challenge the fallacious premises of Brexit, even after winning a landslide general election victory last year, raises doubts about the true scale of his ambition when it comes to the EU reset. That misgiving is magnified whenever British ministers talk enthusiastically about their dealings with Mr Trump, who doesn’t hide his hostility to the European project. Sir Keir insists it is not a binary choice, but it will become one as soon as concessions to the White House threaten to destroy trust in Brussels or further impede access to the single market.

The claim that the UK can be equidistant between Europe and the US may feel like keeping options open, but in Brussels it looks like a reversion to typical British Eurosceptic ambivalence. Sir Keir faces a stark strategic dilemma, and his options get worse the longer he defers the choice.

Standard
China, Economic, Government, International trade, Politics, Society, United States

Global trade war: America is advancing its own decline

ECONOMIC

Intro: China is braced for economic turbulence due to swingeing tariffs. But it sees an opportunity by taking the longer-term view: a decline in US hegemony 

THERE can be no winners in Donald Trump’s ferocious trade war that he has unleashed, least of all among consumers and workers. In strongarm tactics, this has become a game of who can bear more pain. And because trade is at the heart of US ties with its biggest tariff target, China, the rest of the bilateral relationship is likely to deteriorate. That too is concerning.

Yet, paradoxically, despite the economic struggles of recent years, China may see a longer-term opportunity in the current crisis. Beijing’s response to the initial US tariff announcements was measured. Now it vows to “fight to the end” and has imposed an additional 50% tariff on US goods – taking total tax charges to 84% – in retaliation for reciprocated tariffs that Mr Trump now says will hit 125%.

Such an approach is unlikely to falter first. Any concessions would likely be taken as a sign of weakness, encouraging the US to ramp up the pressure even more. Xi Jinping is also a strongman who has dialled up nationalism as economic growth has slowed. Backing down would be humiliating, especially when the US vice-president, JD Vance, speaks dismissively of “Chinese peasants”.

Beijing is already allowing the yuan to weaken, but a major devaluation in the currency is thought unlikely. It has been preparing for this moment. China’s demographic boom is at an end, Mr Xi’s new vision for his nation, the impact of the pandemic, Donald Trump’s first term in office, and US bipartisanship have all turned against China in reshaping the world economy. But China has diversified in areas such as agricultural imports and found new markets for its goods – though exports to the US still account for just under 3% of its GDP. In recent weeks, it announced plans to “vigorously boost” domestic consumption, although previous action on that long-held ambition has not matched the rhetoric.

Mr Trump’s sudden announcement that he is suspending punitive tariffs on other countries for 90 days highlights an apparent underlying intention to make them distance themselves from China and stop them being used as a conduit for its goods. Still, if he goes ahead, high rates risk pushing them towards Beijing instead. Trump’s erratic policy may also reflect growing anxieties about the impact of those tariffs, not least among his own supporters. China is quietly confident that the U.S. will come under growing pressure to rethink from billionaire backers, ageing workers worried that their retirement funds are losing value, farmers, employees fearing for their jobs, and consumers contemplating higher prices in everyday consumables. A bilateral deal is not impossible, but sense needs to be restored.

Beijing does not like what lies ahead. But in the longer term, it has more confidence in its trajectory. It looks back to the 2008 financial crisis, when it “saved the world” with its massive stimulus package, and looks ahead now with emboldened self-assurance following its launch in January of its AI DeepSeek platform.

Above all, Beijing believes that when this storm has passed, few will regard the US as a dependable economic or security guarantor, with China becoming a more predictable and likeable partner. At February’s Munich security conference – where Mr Vance’s sneering attacks on European allies made the headlines – China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, pledged that China would be “a steadfast constructive force” and “factor of certainty in this multipolar system”. Some countries may feel forced to live with Beijing’s own trade and investment restrictions, and its use of economic coercion for political purposes. But others may simply drift from America’s orbit.

China expects to suffer, but as it watches on it will not be entirely unhappy as the US advances its own decline.

This is a transformational moment in the global order.

Standard
Britain, Economic, European Union, Government, International trade, Politics, Society, United States

Trump’s tariffs: a deliberate and revengeful choice

WORLD TRADE

DONALD TRUMP’S revisionist structure of world tariffs against an already embattled trading system is as though an asteroid has crashed into the planet, devastating everyone and everything that previously existed there. The comparison is useful but there is this important difference. If an asteroid struck the Earth, the impact would at least have been caused by ungovernable cosmic forces. The assault on world trade, by contrast, is a completely deliberate act of choice, taken by one man and one nation.

The US President’s decision to impose tariffs on every country in the world is a shocking and momentous act of folly. Unilateral and unjustified, it was expressed in indefensible language in which Mr Trump described US allies as “cheaters” and “scavengers” who “looted”, “raped”, and “pillaged” the US. Many of the calculations on which he doled out his punishments are perverse, not least the exclusion of Russia from the condemned list. The tariffs – imposition of direct taxes – mean prices are certain to rise in every economic sector – in the US and elsewhere – fuelling inflation and very likely recession. Trump will presumably respond as he did when asked about foreign cars becoming more expensive: “I couldn’t care less.”

The tariffs – a minimum of 10% on all imports to the US, with higher levels on 60 nations that have been dubbed the “worst offenders” – throw a hand-grenade into the rules-based global trading order. These are large hikes, even for nations like Britain that have escaped the higher tariffs. They are indiscriminate between sectors, highly discriminatory against nations, even to the extent of penalising uninhabited islands in Antarctica. Foul.

The world trading system established under US leadership at Bretton Woods after the Second World War has been overturned. In effect, the nation that has underpinned the global economy for the last 80 years has expelled itself from the trading system it always led. That system’s cardinal principle – that countries in the World Trade Organisation should treat one another equally – has been blown apart.

The ceremony on which Trump made his announcement conveyed the thrill he derives from bullying and domination. A month after shutting down US development aid, his retribution list embodies special contempt for the world’s poor – 47% tariffs on Madagascar, the world’s ninth poorest country, for instance, or 44% on devastated Myanmar. While much pre-announcement rhetoric was directed at China, some of the toughest tariffs have been inflicted on countries such as Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Laos. The impact on US soft power is likely to be devastating.

In the UK, the government is trying to remain stoic. Like its trustworthy trading allies, Britain must do what it can to maintain the rules-based trading system by keeping calm. But economic war is clearly beckoning. The UK is now said even to be preparing a list of reciprocal tariffs on US goods. It is particularly vital that Britain defends its interests in food and health systems, and against the powerful digital tech giants.

Any kind of notion that Britain is some kind of winner in these circumstances, thanks to Brexit, is nonsensical. This country’s supposedly closest ally, the US, has just hiked the cost to British exporters by 10%, with an even greater rise of 25% in the case of steel, aluminium, and cars. The consequences of Trump’s tariffs will not be restricted to world trade but will impact on the global economic system more generally. This is a momentous macro moment. It will require macro responses.

Standard