>Instead of agreeing to a disadvantageous deal, the EU could have formed a coalition with other affected economies, such as Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and South Korea. This would have created an effective counterweight to US tariff threats. However, the deal concluded today strengthens President Trump’s strategy of pitting other economies against each other.”
so why did we do it??
Telochim on
Jeopardizes? Rules-based? Somoene’s been under a rock for the last decade. We’re in a neo-imperial age, and wimps will prostrate before their superiors, be it willingly or after a profound economic or otherwise beating.
This “trade deal” was just a test stone to see if europeans have any fight in them. They don’t, and they will be mogged and humiliated even more mercilessly soon enough.
Ok_Exit443 on
*EU incapabilities to develop a formidable military, energy independence, and competitive global industries jeopardizes EU lifestyles due to having no negotiating leverage.
FIFY
RichRate6164 on
Before the inevitable wave of rationalizations begins, i.e. claims that the deal is not as bad as it appears, that the EU is executing some brilliant long game to outmaneuver Trump, or that the economic burden will ultimately fall on US consumers, I want to make something clear: even **if** every one of those explanations were true, the optics remain catastrophic. And optics matter a lot!
A political entity that consistently presents itself as submissive, or incapable of asserting its interests on the global stage erodes its own credibility. It invites derision from adversaries and disillusionment from its citizens. This moment will not be read as a nuanced diplomatic maneuver by the broader public or the international community. It will be read as weakness. That perception alone empowers nationalist and extremist forces across Europe and signals to global partners that the EU is a bloc that can be bent under pressure.
Even a single week of the EU standing firm would have demonstrated some measure of backbone. Are we really expected to believe that all our industries would collapse under a tariff imposed for just one week? So why the rush? Trump has shown repeatedly that he will retreat from his ultimatums. Why not at least push back a little? Had this agreement been reached after a week of holding strong, the EU’s position would have appeared far less pathetic. Rushing to his golf course to accept all of his conditions before the deadline is beyond embarrassing.
People will not analyze the intricacies of trade theory or diplomatic chess. They will simply ask: why do we look like we have lost again? Why are we always the ones conceding? Why do we not have leaders who win? In politics, perception often becomes reality, and in this case, the reality being shaped is one in which democratic values look ineffectual, and autocratic strength appears enviable. That is a dangerous trajectory.
Past-Present223 on
I am thinking it was kinda out of the window when Trump got elected to 2nd term.
Gogs85 on
Is it an either / or? Maybe that is the way it’ll go long-term but it would take more time to figure out and they have to respond to the tariffs quickly.
Trolljak on
The rules: do what america wants
DingoCertain on
Our leaders have a backbone made of jelly. It’s only a matter of time before Trump comes back with more outrageous demands, and our bureaucrats will do this again, because they care more about the US than our countries.
Mordeth on
Because rules-based global trade is already dead. Killed by the USA when it destroyed the WTO’s ability to exact binding rulings by simply not allowing renewal of its mandate. Bipartisan policy, btw.
Toolatethehero3 on
There are no rules. Europe is naive. It’s bilateral agreements (which the US demonstrates it won’t follow the moment it’s convenient) but that’s all. EU needs to wake up and realize the US is not its ally. The US wants to exploit the foolish rather childlike Europeans as much as possible.
KentishTun on
Rules require enforcement or consent.
The sooner we all live in the real world, the better.
MaddogFinland on
I am surprised anyone assumed this would go better than it has given that the EU held basically no cards and is completely exposed to huge security risks right now.
As it stands we were going to buy a massive amount of military equipment anyway, because European producers wouldn’t be able to ramp up fast enough and many weapons aren’t available elsewhere.
The EU has been also offering huge energy purchases for at least a year so that was a main European idea dating to the late Biden years.
So those two things were going to happen anyway…now it’s part of this “deal”.
We weren’t going to get a better deal than 15 percent and on the balance it’s a far better idea to remember that we have a major Russia problem right now. And no matter what you bluffers want to claim, 30 percent would have been a disaster.
Europe spent 30 years squandering its hard power so let’s not all act like we had much choice. We should use the current agreement to strengthen out ties with other trading partners, avoid a recession, and get our military affairs in order.
Econ_Orc on
Why is everyone calling it a bad deal?
It is bad for Europe and it is bad for USA, but it fractures the western alliance of USA and Europe.
So it is a good deal for Russia and China.
See it is not a bad deal for everyone.
It is odd though that no one explained this to Trump. Maybe South Park or Colbert could make an episode showing the pros and cons of tariffs. That way we would be sure Trump sees it.
Piano_Man_1994 on
How many lobbyists and politicians on the EU side are more exposed to the S&P than to European assets. I have no idea, I’m just wondering. Is it possible these people just don’t give a shit?
14 commenti
>Instead of agreeing to a disadvantageous deal, the EU could have formed a coalition with other affected economies, such as Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and South Korea. This would have created an effective counterweight to US tariff threats. However, the deal concluded today strengthens President Trump’s strategy of pitting other economies against each other.”
so why did we do it??
Jeopardizes? Rules-based? Somoene’s been under a rock for the last decade. We’re in a neo-imperial age, and wimps will prostrate before their superiors, be it willingly or after a profound economic or otherwise beating.
This “trade deal” was just a test stone to see if europeans have any fight in them. They don’t, and they will be mogged and humiliated even more mercilessly soon enough.
*EU incapabilities to develop a formidable military, energy independence, and competitive global industries jeopardizes EU lifestyles due to having no negotiating leverage.
FIFY
Before the inevitable wave of rationalizations begins, i.e. claims that the deal is not as bad as it appears, that the EU is executing some brilliant long game to outmaneuver Trump, or that the economic burden will ultimately fall on US consumers, I want to make something clear: even **if** every one of those explanations were true, the optics remain catastrophic. And optics matter a lot!
A political entity that consistently presents itself as submissive, or incapable of asserting its interests on the global stage erodes its own credibility. It invites derision from adversaries and disillusionment from its citizens. This moment will not be read as a nuanced diplomatic maneuver by the broader public or the international community. It will be read as weakness. That perception alone empowers nationalist and extremist forces across Europe and signals to global partners that the EU is a bloc that can be bent under pressure.
Even a single week of the EU standing firm would have demonstrated some measure of backbone. Are we really expected to believe that all our industries would collapse under a tariff imposed for just one week? So why the rush? Trump has shown repeatedly that he will retreat from his ultimatums. Why not at least push back a little? Had this agreement been reached after a week of holding strong, the EU’s position would have appeared far less pathetic. Rushing to his golf course to accept all of his conditions before the deadline is beyond embarrassing.
People will not analyze the intricacies of trade theory or diplomatic chess. They will simply ask: why do we look like we have lost again? Why are we always the ones conceding? Why do we not have leaders who win? In politics, perception often becomes reality, and in this case, the reality being shaped is one in which democratic values look ineffectual, and autocratic strength appears enviable. That is a dangerous trajectory.
I am thinking it was kinda out of the window when Trump got elected to 2nd term.
Is it an either / or? Maybe that is the way it’ll go long-term but it would take more time to figure out and they have to respond to the tariffs quickly.
The rules: do what america wants
Our leaders have a backbone made of jelly. It’s only a matter of time before Trump comes back with more outrageous demands, and our bureaucrats will do this again, because they care more about the US than our countries.
Because rules-based global trade is already dead. Killed by the USA when it destroyed the WTO’s ability to exact binding rulings by simply not allowing renewal of its mandate. Bipartisan policy, btw.
There are no rules. Europe is naive. It’s bilateral agreements (which the US demonstrates it won’t follow the moment it’s convenient) but that’s all. EU needs to wake up and realize the US is not its ally. The US wants to exploit the foolish rather childlike Europeans as much as possible.
Rules require enforcement or consent.
The sooner we all live in the real world, the better.
I am surprised anyone assumed this would go better than it has given that the EU held basically no cards and is completely exposed to huge security risks right now.
As it stands we were going to buy a massive amount of military equipment anyway, because European producers wouldn’t be able to ramp up fast enough and many weapons aren’t available elsewhere.
The EU has been also offering huge energy purchases for at least a year so that was a main European idea dating to the late Biden years.
So those two things were going to happen anyway…now it’s part of this “deal”.
We weren’t going to get a better deal than 15 percent and on the balance it’s a far better idea to remember that we have a major Russia problem right now. And no matter what you bluffers want to claim, 30 percent would have been a disaster.
Europe spent 30 years squandering its hard power so let’s not all act like we had much choice. We should use the current agreement to strengthen out ties with other trading partners, avoid a recession, and get our military affairs in order.
Why is everyone calling it a bad deal?
It is bad for Europe and it is bad for USA, but it fractures the western alliance of USA and Europe.
So it is a good deal for Russia and China.
See it is not a bad deal for everyone.
It is odd though that no one explained this to Trump. Maybe South Park or Colbert could make an episode showing the pros and cons of tariffs. That way we would be sure Trump sees it.
How many lobbyists and politicians on the EU side are more exposed to the S&P than to European assets. I have no idea, I’m just wondering. Is it possible these people just don’t give a shit?