The Labour government apparently believe
that they are ready for Trump, having gamed a number of different scenarios.
That sounds a bit complacent to me: the one thing that is absolutely predictable
about Trump is his utter unpredictability. The probability that the UK government
can have foreseen all possibilities is remote. It seems increasingly as though the
team Trump is assembling around him do indeed have some sort of coherent –
albeit deeply unpleasant – programme, but whether they will be able to keep him
to it is likely to remain unclear for some time to come. I find myself wondering
who exactly the ‘useful idiot’ in all this is. Are his team Trump’s useful idiots,
or is he theirs? Him not being the idiot might seem unlikely, but it might
still be the better scenario.
Whether he will go ahead with his scheme to impose 10% tariffs
on all goods entering the US is yet to be seen. He really does seem to believe
that the countries and companies sending those goods will pay the tariff with
no impact on the prices paid by American consumers. It’s the stuff of make
believe. It is certainly likely to disrupt trade relations and is likely to be
counter to World Trade Organisation rules. That latter won’t worry him, not least
because he knows that WTO rules and processes mean that it will be years before
the WTO can co-ordinate its response, and he will no longer be president by
then (assuming that he doesn’t also somehow manage to abolish the two-term limit
on presidents – or even abolish elections – in the meantime). There are only
two countries or trading blocs big enough and powerful enough to take meaningful
retaliatory action, and they are China and the EU.
The UK’s response so far – trying to persuade Trump to exempt
the UK from an otherwise universal tariff – assumes that the so-called special
relationship is something more than an outdated form of words. But such special
pleading is not only not helpful to rebuilding relationships with the EU, it
also looks like weakness. Trump might well like to see weakness and
supplication before him, but the idea that he will respond otherwise than by
taking advantage of any weakness is completely at odds with his nature and history.
Starmer’s obsession with not challenging any of the consequences of Brexit, and
his willingness to bend the knee to Trump look likely only to compound those
consequences.
4 comments:
The simplest analysis is to treat Trump as an old-fashioned Democrat. He is from NYC and was an actual Dem at one point. Hence
(1) he is anti-war and will end the Ukraine slaughter
(2) he is pro free speech
(3) he holds the common view that abortion is OK in the first trimester
(4) he will keep Obamacare and Welfare
(5) he will not allow prosecutors to have a political bias.
So far so normal for us Liberals in Europe.
The US will also revert to normal in that
Trade deal - many Americans still remember 1776 and do not take Brits at the Brits' own valuation. They will protect American commerce. Weird, I know.
Tariffs - Trump talks a lot about imposing them. It is often more a threat to get a concession on something else. The US is actually very selective because they are not stupid.
NATO - like most people, Trump thinks NATO is out of date. We need a wholly new Security Pact.
It will take a while for all this to sink in the UK and Europe, in certain circles anyway. The reason why there has been so little reaction to the GOP win is partly that it was decisive. But really, the people who actually voted Dem know that up does not equal down any more
Anonymous comment was me. I might add that Trump is not so Democrat in that he favours reducing centralised power in DC. Many Americans and Europleans think the same thing. Applies to London v Wales of course too. Some US Agencies can be abolished eg Education, which has an odd history and is low-hanging fruit. Or its a question of adjusting office space and employment to the digital age and wfh. Musk cut 80% at X, no downside. Upside = improve free speech.
Opinions differ, of course. But I'm not convinced that everyone would agree with your claim that there was no downside to an 80% cut at Twitter/ X. Not just for users, but some of the employment practices implemented to cope with the impact of severe staffing cuts are what an observer might euphemistically call 'interesting'.
Oh, and he's not exactly a fan of wfh either...
Post a Comment