Why Trump may regret picking a tariff fight with Mexico — even if he wins
Timing is everything
Donald Trump won the first round of his standoff with Mexico over immigration policies. Despite heavy opposition to his use of tariffs as leverage on immigration policies, even from his own party, the move worked. Trump gained at least some short-term concessions that could improve matters on the border. But will that translate into a lasting victory at the southern border – and will it boost his chances at re-election next year?
First, Trump might have to convince people that he actually won the first round. Americans have long experience with politicians who spin every development, no matter how damaging, into victories. The president has more of a reputation than most others in national politics for bragging and self-promotion, which makes it even more difficult to overcome skepticism.
Skepticism is a wise starting position in any event, but is it warranted here? The New York Times ran a lengthy analysis on Saturday that declared that Mexico hadn't agreed to anything new. The government of Andrés Manuel López Obrador had already agreed to increase its security presence on its own southern border in March, the Times reported, and an earlier agreement — already touted by the Trump administration in December — committed Mexico to holding more of the asylum seekers on their side of the border. But the Times report later notes significant additional concessions by Mexico. They had to significantly increase their numbers on the southern border to 6,000 troops — and had to actually deploy them in force, which hadn't begun until Trump threatened to apply tariffs. The López Obrador government also agreed to "accelerate" the protocols that held asylum seekers in Mexico, as well as expand them, in order to keep more of them from entering the U.S.
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.
The Washington Post offered a more positive view of the agreement. Their headline suggested that Mexico had "talked Trump out of [his] tariff threat," and the analysis said they did so "by agreeing to an unprecedented crackdown on Central American migrants and accepting more-expansive measures in Mexico if the initial efforts don't deliver quick results." Those expansive measures, reported according to communications between negotiators, "include the deployment of a militarized national guard at the Guatemalan border, thousands of additional migrant arrests per week and the acceptance of busloads of asylum seekers turned away from the U.S. border daily."
The only major demand that Trump didn't win in the fight was an adoption of a "safe third country" protocol by Mexico. That would force migrants from Central and South America to apply for asylum in the first safe country they enter — arguably Mexico, although drug cartel violence might make that a questionable call. López Obrador had long opposed that policy, and he managed to avoid it — for now. In one measure of who won this standoff, foreign minister Marcelo Ebrard told reporters that they only staved off the demand by asking Mike Pence for time to show that other actions would be effective in solving the American border crisis.
"In the meeting with the vice president of the United States," Ebrard told reporters on Monday, "they were insistent on the safe third country issue. We told them — I think it was the most important achievement of the negotiations — ‘let's set a time period to see if what Mexico is proposing will work, and if not, we'll sit down and see what additional measures' [are required]." If the numbers of migrants hitting the U.S. border do not decline appreciably, Ebrard said, Mexico might have to adopt the protocol to avoid damaging tariffs.
Even apart from Trump's later claims of secret provisions in the agreement — which Mexico's diplomats denied — Trump won the first round of this wrestling match. Mexico now has to show positive improvement over the next 90 days (with a 45-day review mark) or make even more concessions to avoid tariffs, which Trump announced were "indefinitely suspended" rather than canceled. "You have to give the president credit," said Mitch McConnell, who had publicly criticized Trump's use of tariffs as leverage on immigration policy. "It worked."
But for how long, and how well? This first-round win makes it almost impossible for Congress to overturn tariffs if Mexico's actions don't significantly alleviate the border crisis. However, a new round of tariffs will do real economic damage in the U.S. as well as Mexico, at just the time when Trump will need a strong economy to keep his re-election hopes alive.
The review period for this agreement comes 90 days from now. That puts off another potential round of tariff brinkmanship to immediately after Labor Day, when voters begin to pay more attention to the Democratic presidential primaries. A show of toughness from Trump might play well with voters, but if tariffs start dragging down the U.S. economy as we head into the holidays and the first Democratic contests, it will drag down Trump's numbers with it. López Obrador will certainly understand that.
Even incremental improvement might be a political problem for Trump. He ran on the demand to build a border wall, and has used the crisis over the last several months to argue that's more necessary than ever before. What happens if Mexico's harsher enforcement alleviates that pressure? Congress isn't likely to act in a bipartisan manner on immigration reform and border security in an election year, especially not after the divisive fight over Trump's national emergency declaration. The path of least resistance for Democrats and no small number of Republicans will be to argue for a pause rather than going full steam ahead on Trump's "big, beautiful wall."
Can Trump win re-election without the wall? Can he generate the same kind of enthusiasm for his campaign if the pressure on immigration gets reduced? Unless Trump wins big in this gamble by forcing a solution that eliminates most of the pressure on the border, he might end up in a twilight zone where immigration hasn't improved enough to claim a lasting win, but no longer hits a crisis level that will energize the populist-conservative base Trump needs for re-election.
Trump did prove that American trade carries a lot of leverage with Mexico, a point that argues for more potential success than most of his critics credited at the beginning of this standoff. For that reason alone, perhaps it's best to be a little skeptical — but not close-minded — about the potential for further success.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
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
Edward Morrissey has been writing about politics since 2003 in his blog, Captain's Quarters, and now writes for HotAir.com. His columns have appeared in the Washington Post, the New York Post, The New York Sun, the Washington Times, and other newspapers. Morrissey has a daily Internet talk show on politics and culture at Hot Air. Since 2004, Morrissey has had a weekend talk radio show in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area and often fills in as a guest on Salem Radio Network's nationally-syndicated shows. He lives in the Twin Cities area of Minnesota with his wife, son and daughter-in-law, and his two granddaughters. Morrissey's new book, GOING RED, will be published by Crown Forum on April 5, 2016.
-
6 unmissable museum exhibitions to see this fall
The Week Recommends Elizabeth Catlett, Tamara de Lempicka and Marina Abramovic are in the spotlight
By Catherine Garcia, The Week US Published
-
College admissions data reveals early effects of affirmative action's end
In the spotlight A sneak peek at how the Supreme Court's decision has panned out
By Theara Coleman, The Week US Published
-
'Farmland has declined under both parties'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, 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
-
Supreme Court rejects challenge to CFPB
Speed Read The court rejected a conservative-backed challenge to the way the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is funded
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Arizona court reinstates 1864 abortion ban
Speed Read The law makes all abortions illegal in the state except to save the mother's life
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump, billions richer, is selling Bibles
Speed Read The former president is hawking a $60 "God Bless the USA Bible"
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published