Trump is losing control of his trade war
If he ever had it, that is
President Trump isn't just losing his trade war — he's losing his grip on it.
Trump already imposed tariffs on $34 billion worth of Chinese imports, and Beijing has responded in kind. Now Trump is threatening to crank it up to $500 billion — nearly the entirety of what China sends to the U.S. Beyond China, Trump is publicly musing about tariffs on all imported cars and parts. Of course, all of this is infuriating major world powers, which could harm Trump's own voters.
Trump badly needs to lay out his endgame for these ill-conceived trade fights. Otherwise, we risk a situation in which the logic of hitting back whenever you've been hit can lead the conflict to spin out of control, with all parties completely losing sight of the original grievances.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Really, what's the point of Trump's tariffs on China? What is he hoping to achieve beyond the rather empty public soothing of justifiable working-class grievances?
Now, I know that the president does have a list of demands he'd like to see the Chinese address. This is what ostensibly motivated his initial 25 percent tariff on that $34 billion in goods China ships to the U.S. But the demands are so sweeping as to be almost meaningless. Furthermore, they mostly address intellectual property rights for big American corporations and investor market access in China. They're hardly the kind of changes that would drive robust job and wage growth for the "forgotten" blue-collar workers Trump claims to champion here at home.
Trump's tactics similarly reveal no larger strategy for maneuvering China into actually addressing American interests in the trade relationship. After China responded with a 25 percent tariff on $34 billion in American exports, Trump immediately began talking about escalating to $200 billion. Now he's already skipped ahead to threatening duties on $500 billion in Chinese exports. That isn't the product of careful strategy. It's wild. We hit them, they hit back, so now we'll hit them even harder.
Trump isn't prepared for this. The Chinese only import $130 billion from us, so they couldn't match Trump's $500 billion escalation directly. Instead, they'll have to get creative. There are many ways they could do that. But one in particular will probably be by targeting Trump's own voters. "Nearly two-thirds of the jobs in industries targeted by China's tariffs — a total of more than 1 million jobs — are in more than 2,100 counties that voted for Trump," The Washington Post's Greg Sargent reported. "By contrast, barely more than one-third of the jobs in China-targeted industries — just over half a million — are in the counties that voted for Clinton." And this divergence actually increased as China's tariffs went through their planning stages.
It's also crucial to remember that Trump is an elected official in a democracy, and he won in 2016 with very slender majorities in a few key states even as he lost the popular vote. His voters' sense of their own economic well-being will play a big role in whether they stick by the GOP in this year's midterms, and by Trump himself in 2020. China, by contrast, is not a democracy: Its leaders face no such reckoning.
Why is Trump doing this? What can he possibly hope to gain beyond being viewed superficially as a protector of the "forgotten" American worker? That is not a strategy for long-term success.
You can see it, too, in Trump's interest in auto tariffs. Again, this seems driven mostly by Trump's belligerent, tribal instincts. "You guys are flooding our streets with German cars. I can't go anywhere without seeing one. They're flying up and down the streets here," he reportedly told German Chancellor Angela Merkel last year. "Do you have Fords and Chevrolets flying up and down streets in Germany too?"
Granted, America's auto trade with the European Union is a bit of a mess. The EU imposes a 9.8 percent tariff on its passenger car imports, while the U.S. only imposes a 2.5 percent tariff on its imports. And globally we run a $200 billion trade deficit in the auto sector. But America also has a 25 percent tariff on light pickup trucks that dates back to the 1960s.
If Trump wanted everyone to just ratchet down to the same level, it would make more sense to get rid of the pickup truck tariff while also escalating the passenger car tariff to match the EU. Going for a 25 percent tariff instead is just wildly out of proportion.
In fact, according Politico, Trump's only support for the auto tariffs among his own senior officials comes from trade adviser Peter Navarro. Not even U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who has generally favored Trump's line on trade, is on board. A recent public hearing on the idea brought almost universal condemnation of new tariffs from American auto manufacturers, suppliers, dealers, and repair shops. Only the autoworkers union supported the move, and even their testimony expressed skepticism of applying the tariffs globally.
Meanwhile, the combination of the auto tariff threats and the duties on steel and aluminum Trump's already imposed is driving major trading partners away from compromise rather than towards it. A two-day meeting of the G20 ended this weekend in deadlock and grim preparation from European countries for future retaliation of their own. Few major Western countries are interested in any new one-on-one trade deals with America so long as the previous tariffs remain in effect.
This is where we are: The president is losing his already weak handle on a trade war he never should have started, and now finds himself caught in an ever-escalating spiral of tit-for-tat, leading nowhere in particular, more and more detached from any underlying policy justification, and fueled by little more than the raw fury of Trump's ego.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Jeff Spross was the economics and business correspondent at TheWeek.com. He was previously a reporter at ThinkProgress.
-
Will California's EV mandate survive Trump, SCOTUS challenge?
Today's Big Question The Golden State's climate goal faces big obstacles
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
'Underneath the noise, however, there’s an existential crisis'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
2024: the year of distrust in science
In the Spotlight Science and politics do not seem to mix
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Biden, Trump urge calm after assassination attempt
Speed Reads A 20-year-old gunman grazed Trump's ear and fatally shot a rally attendee on Saturday
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published