logo
US trade war enters precarious 'Slow Grind' phase

US trade war enters precarious 'Slow Grind' phase

US trade negotiations have transitioned from their opening act, with its many twists and turns, into a new, protracted chapter: the Slow Grind. It may be less turbulent than this past spring's drama, but no less worrying for investors.
Now that the US and China have the framework for a trade agreement, attention may start to turn to the European Union, which appears next in line to strike a deal with the Trump administration. But the prospect of a swift resolution seems remote.
Finding significant common ground to meaningfully reduce the EU's substantial goods surplus with the US, roughly US$200 billion annually, presents a formidable challenge, as major avenues appear blocked.
The EU is highly unlikely to concede on agricultural market access given the region's strong and comprehensive policy for protecting local agriculture.
Large-scale aircraft deals also seem improbable given the Airbus-Boeing rivalry. The contentious issue of pharmaceutical pricing will complicate any healthcare deals.
While Europe could theoretically increase purchases of US defence equipment or relax "Buy European" policies in defence procurement, the political palatability of such moves is low.
Consequently, the focus may inevitably shift towards the services sector, where the EU runs an approximately US$100 billion annual deficit with the US, driven largely by the operations of American technology giants.
Here, a potential landing zone exists: the EU could conceivably ease some of its more burdensome technology regulations with limited immediate downside, offering a tangible, albeit partial, lever to address the overall trade imbalance.
In fact, Section 899 in the Trump administration's proposed "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" — which threatens to increase taxes on entities from countries with "unfair foreign taxes" — appears to be aimed directly at digital taxes levied by EU countries on US technology companies. This suggests that this area could be a focal point in US-EU negotiations.
US negotiations with the EU are also occurring against a markedly different backdrop than the one that prevailed in May during the earlier round of trade talks with China.
Back then, the US was just emerging from a significant bout of financial market volatility and facing the risk of "empty shelves" if onerous tariffs on China remained in place, so both investors and business leaders were demanding urgent action.
Importantly, EU exports to the US are predominantly industrial and luxury goods, not the daily consumables that directly impact the average American's pocketbook.
Adding to this calmer backdrop, capital markets have shown signs of adapting to the current administration's seemingly unpredictable trade tactics.
The S&P 500 index has rebounded 20 per cent since its post-Liberation Day low and is only around 2.0 per cent below its all-time high.
One major risk, however, is that the US starts taking a harder line with Europe for fear of looking weak. Central to the US negotiation strategy is the perceived credibility of threats.
Given the Trump administration's emphasis on the president's deal-making prowess, the US fundamentally cannot afford to be seen as backing down consistently, a scenario some critics have labelled "Trump Always Chickens Out" (TACO).
Being perceived as unreliable with ultimatums would critically undermine the administration's negotiating power, not just with the EU, but globally.
This need to maintain a credible hard line could add friction to the process, making concessions harder to make and progress slower to achieve.
On the currency front, the euro may continue to appreciate against the US dollar — ending a more than decade-long trend of greenback strength — if wary European investors bring more capital back home.
This could give the European Central Bank greater leeway to implement interest rate cuts, with less immediate concern about imported inflation.
However, such euro strength has historically been negatively correlated with the performance of risk assets more broadly, adding another layer of complexity to the investment landscape.
Further complicating the picture is the risk that the tentative deal just reached with China could unravel, reflecting the ongoing tug-of-war within the US administration between China hawks and pragmatists.
The frenetic pace of the trade war's opening chapter has given way to a more arduous phase.
This "Slow Grind" promises to generate more uncertainty, testing the patience of markets and policymakers alike, with progress likely measured in inches rather than miles.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump due in Canada as G7 confronts Israel–Iran crisis
Trump due in Canada as G7 confronts Israel–Iran crisis

New Straits Times

time43 minutes ago

  • New Straits Times

Trump due in Canada as G7 confronts Israel–Iran crisis

KANANASKIS, Canada: Group of Seven leaders, including US President Donald Trump, began arriving Sunday in the Canadian Rockies for a summit where they will consider whether to take a common stance as violence intensifies between Israel and Iran. The three-day gathering in the mountain town of Kananaskis marks the return to the international diplomatic calendar of Trump, who in his second term has been even more emboldened to shatter norms. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney had designed an agenda aimed at minimising disagreements within the club of wealthy industrial democracies – Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United States. But Canada is now sounding out countries about making a joint call for "de-escalation" between Israel and Iran, a diplomat said. Two days before the summit began, Israel stunned the world with a massive military campaign that it says is aimed at destroying Iran's nuclear programme and has targeted officials, scientists, and security sites. Iran has fired back with drones and missiles at Israel, with senior officials from both countries threatening massive destruction. Both sides say civilians have been killed in the strikes. G7 leaders could see divisions over the crisis. Trump has praised Israel's strikes, noting it used US weapons, even though Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defied his public calls to hold off as the United States sought a negotiated solution with Iran on the cleric-run state's contested nuclear work. European powers have been cautious and refrained from criticising Israel. French President Emmanuel Macron has called for restraint and urged Iran to re-enter talks with the United States, while blaming Tehran for escalating tensions over its nuclear programme. Japan, which historically has maintained cordial ties with Iran, made a forceful break with allies in the United States and Europe when it denounced Israel's strikes as "deeply regrettable." Trump is visiting Canada despite his mockery of the United States' northern neighbour, which he has said would be better off as the 51st state. Tensions have eased since Carney, a former central banker known more for his competence than pizzazz, took over in March from Justin Trudeau, an erstwhile star on the global stage whom Trump made no secret of disliking. When Trump last visited Canada for a G7 summit in 2018, he bolted out early and from Air Force One tweeted insults about Trudeau, disassociating the United States from the final statement. Carney plans to meet early Monday with Trump, a Canadian official said. Carney met in Ottawa on Sunday with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer ahead of the summit. The ongoing Ukraine–Russia war will also be up for discussion at the G7. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is among the invited guests and hopes to speak to Trump, who publicly derided him when they met at the White House on February 28. Trump had hoped to force Ukraine into a quick deal with Russia but he has grown frustrated after President Vladimir Putin refused US-led appeals for at least a temporary truce. Trump spoke by telephone with Putin on Saturday, both about the Israel–Iran conflict and Ukraine. French President Macron, however, cast doubt on Putin serving as a Middle East mediator and said he wanted to see if Trump would be willing to impose future sanctions on Russia. Macron headed to Kananaskis after stopping in Greenland, where he denounced Trump's threats to seize the Danish autonomous territory. "That's not what allies do," he said. Trump, for his part, will arrive at the summit after attending a military parade in Washington that coincided with his birthday, prompting nationwide protests over steps seen as increasingly authoritarian. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also spoke by telephone Saturday with Trump and called for pressure on Russia over the Ukraine invasion. She again voiced hope for progress in trade talks. Trump, seeking a radical transformation of a global economic order centred on free trade, has vowed to slap sweeping tariffs on US friends and foes alike on July 9, a deadline he postponed once. Other leaders invited to the summit include Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as Canada hopes to reset ties. Trudeau had accused Modi's government of masterminding the assassination of a Sikh separatist in Canada, which expelled the Indian ambassador, prompting New Delhi to take punitive action of its own.

US trade war enters precarious 'Slow Grind' phase
US trade war enters precarious 'Slow Grind' phase

New Straits Times

time7 hours ago

  • New Straits Times

US trade war enters precarious 'Slow Grind' phase

US trade negotiations have transitioned from their opening act, with its many twists and turns, into a new, protracted chapter: the Slow Grind. It may be less turbulent than this past spring's drama, but no less worrying for investors. Now that the US and China have the framework for a trade agreement, attention may start to turn to the European Union, which appears next in line to strike a deal with the Trump administration. But the prospect of a swift resolution seems remote. Finding significant common ground to meaningfully reduce the EU's substantial goods surplus with the US, roughly US$200 billion annually, presents a formidable challenge, as major avenues appear blocked. The EU is highly unlikely to concede on agricultural market access given the region's strong and comprehensive policy for protecting local agriculture. Large-scale aircraft deals also seem improbable given the Airbus-Boeing rivalry. The contentious issue of pharmaceutical pricing will complicate any healthcare deals. While Europe could theoretically increase purchases of US defence equipment or relax "Buy European" policies in defence procurement, the political palatability of such moves is low. Consequently, the focus may inevitably shift towards the services sector, where the EU runs an approximately US$100 billion annual deficit with the US, driven largely by the operations of American technology giants. Here, a potential landing zone exists: the EU could conceivably ease some of its more burdensome technology regulations with limited immediate downside, offering a tangible, albeit partial, lever to address the overall trade imbalance. In fact, Section 899 in the Trump administration's proposed "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" — which threatens to increase taxes on entities from countries with "unfair foreign taxes" — appears to be aimed directly at digital taxes levied by EU countries on US technology companies. This suggests that this area could be a focal point in US-EU negotiations. US negotiations with the EU are also occurring against a markedly different backdrop than the one that prevailed in May during the earlier round of trade talks with China. Back then, the US was just emerging from a significant bout of financial market volatility and facing the risk of "empty shelves" if onerous tariffs on China remained in place, so both investors and business leaders were demanding urgent action. Importantly, EU exports to the US are predominantly industrial and luxury goods, not the daily consumables that directly impact the average American's pocketbook. Adding to this calmer backdrop, capital markets have shown signs of adapting to the current administration's seemingly unpredictable trade tactics. The S&P 500 index has rebounded 20 per cent since its post-Liberation Day low and is only around 2.0 per cent below its all-time high. One major risk, however, is that the US starts taking a harder line with Europe for fear of looking weak. Central to the US negotiation strategy is the perceived credibility of threats. Given the Trump administration's emphasis on the president's deal-making prowess, the US fundamentally cannot afford to be seen as backing down consistently, a scenario some critics have labelled "Trump Always Chickens Out" (TACO). Being perceived as unreliable with ultimatums would critically undermine the administration's negotiating power, not just with the EU, but globally. This need to maintain a credible hard line could add friction to the process, making concessions harder to make and progress slower to achieve. On the currency front, the euro may continue to appreciate against the US dollar — ending a more than decade-long trend of greenback strength — if wary European investors bring more capital back home. This could give the European Central Bank greater leeway to implement interest rate cuts, with less immediate concern about imported inflation. However, such euro strength has historically been negatively correlated with the performance of risk assets more broadly, adding another layer of complexity to the investment landscape. Further complicating the picture is the risk that the tentative deal just reached with China could unravel, reflecting the ongoing tug-of-war within the US administration between China hawks and pragmatists. The frenetic pace of the trade war's opening chapter has given way to a more arduous phase. This "Slow Grind" promises to generate more uncertainty, testing the patience of markets and policymakers alike, with progress likely measured in inches rather than miles.

The US is dooming the UN
The US is dooming the UN

The Star

time8 hours ago

  • The Star

The US is dooming the UN

SAY you are president of the United States and you've been clear that you put America First and that you disdain 'globalists' and all their organs of international multilateralism, chief among them the United Nations. How do you go about discrediting those institutions? One option is to withdraw the US formally. For example, Donald Trump began his second term by announcing that he'll pull the country out of parts of the UN system, including its Human Rights Council, the World Health Organisation and the Paris Agreement on climate change. That just about hobbles these conventions, since fighting, say, pandemics or global warming without American participation seems futile. But the attack doesn't need to be so blunt. You could also nominally remain a member of an institution while ignoring, undermining or sabotaging it. The US still belongs to the World Trade Organisation, for example, even though Trump has inverted its foundational idea by launching a trade war on the world. America also remains, for now, the backbone of Nato, although Trump has undermined its credibility by casting doubt on the US commitment to Article 5, the alliance's mutual-defence clause and thus its reason for being. Something similar is happening at the UN. In 2015 all its members, including the US, adopted an updated mission statement in the form of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These were meant to be answers to humanity's biggest problems, from ending hunger and poverty to improving health and education and reducing inequality. Even though progress on most of these efforts is running behind schedule, it's hard to fault the intention. And yet the US now does. In March, it formally rejected the SDGs. It was a bizarre spectacle. The task fell to a mid-level diplomat named Edward Heartney, and the occasion was a vote in the General Assembly to adopt an 'International Day of Peaceful Coexistence'. An anodyne ritual, you might think, but you'd be wrong. Heartney got up and delivered a philippic against the 'soft global governance that is inconsistent with US sovereignty'. Such 'globalist endeavours... lost at the ballot box', Heartney went on – referring to the US election in 2024 – which is why America 'rejects and denounces' the SDGs. The audience, more used to hearing such outbursts from rogue states, was stunned. Mark Leon Goldberg, a veteran UN watcher, told me that even Heartney, a career foreign service officer, looked as though he had a gun to his head and was recording a hostage video. And yet, the speech set the tone for what was to come. The US now regularly gums up every proceeding it can. In June, it cast the only no vote (compared with 169 in favour) against a Mongolian resolution to introduce a World Horse Day. Why? To protest against those SDGs, of course, and everything that 'impinges upon state sovereignty as a soft form of global governance'. America's opposition to the SDGs is more than symbolic. This past week, almost all member states are gathering in France for the UN Ocean Conference to make progress on SDG No 14, on saving the world's oceans and seas (which are in at least as much trouble as our atmosphere). The Trump administration is boycotting that meeting. Instead, Trump recently ordered a push to mine international seabeds for minerals, one of the things the conference is most urgently trying to regulate. He and the Republican Congress are also planning to defund the UN system and other international organisations. Since the US has been the largest contributor to UN coffers since the organisation's founding in 1945 (its share of the regular budget was 22 % in 2024), the cutbacks will force the UN to shrink or close programmes (even if it becomes more efficient, as it should). Reform of the UN's Security Council – an aspiration of the Biden administration – is also off the table. The US, like Russia and China, instead exacerbates its dysfunction: In June, 14 of the council's 15 members voted for a resolution demanding a ceasefire in Gaza; the US vetoed it. Goldberg hopes that the nomination of Michael Waltz as the US ambassador to the UN might provide some relief: Waltz was Trump's national security adviser until May and with his high profile might be 'able to explain the value the UN gives to American security interests'. I doubt it. Waltz's move to the UN was meant as a demotion. If anything, it confirms that Trump views the institution as a dead end. Cumulatively, this trend away from multilateralism, which Trump didn't start but is turbo-boosting, is already changing the world, and for the worse. 'There hasn't been a binding international agreement on any matter – any transnational issue of importance' for years, laments Shivshankar Menon, a former national security adviser of India; 'we're a world adrift'. The historical echoes are ominous. The UN's forerunner was the League of Nations. Conceived by leaders such as then US President Woodrow Wilson at the end of World War I, it was meant to prevent a second. But Wilson's own country then failed to ratify the treaty after Republicans in the Senate turned isolationist. Without American support, the League was powerless to stop the aggression of fascist Italy, Japan and Germany, and gradually became irrelevant as the world went up in flames. Even so, it was formally dissolved only in 1946, when the new UN – finally backed by the US – took its place. Say you're that American president again and, like Trump, you want to be remembered as a 'peacemaker'. Wouldn't you start by broadening your understanding of the UN's reason for existing, and of the bleak scenarios if the UN went the way of the League? If Waltz wants to redeem his career and legacy – a long shot – he should muster the courage to educate the White House that the United Nations isn't America's enemy, but potentially its best friend, if not its last best hope. — Bloomberg Opinion/TNS Andreas Kluth is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering US diplomacy, national security and geopolitics.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store