
Johns Hopkins Economist Recommends Asia Build More Ties As Trump Even More ‘Tariff-Pilled' Than In First Administration
Courtesy of Henry Farrell
Henry Farrell
NEW YORK — Henry Farrell, 54, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, said in an interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun that U.S. President Donald Trump seems to have become more 'tariff-pilled,' and Asian countries should start to build many more ties in a world where the 'sponsor is becoming less predictable.'
The following excerpts from the interview have been edited for flow and clarity.
The Yomiuri Shimbun: What is your view of the Trump administration's tariff measures?
Henry Farrell: Obviously, he [Trump] is much more willing to use tariffs on a much grander scale than he was back in the first administration; the sheer scale of what has happened is … basically historically unprecedented. I think that he has become more convinced that tariffs obviously have much broader application than just trying to get the United States a better deal on trade. There's interest in using them for all sorts of other policy measures as well … some of which are traditional national security.
He appears to have gotten further 'tariff-pilled' than he was before, in [the] belief that traditional financial sanctions are a bad idea for the U.S. dollar.
Yomiuri: What do you think about the effects of these tariffs on the international order and how they will affect the United States?
Farrell: I think that the effects are pretty substantial. I think that a lot of this has to do with not just … the size of the tariffs, but the ways that the tariffs are being deployed.
There are negotiations that are happening, but it's not clear whether those negotiations are going to get anywhere … because there are some people in the administration, including sometimes Trump himself, who seem to think that tariffs are fundamentally a good thing. That is that they're not something that can be removed or added on. And furthermore, when people do talk about what the tariffs are there for, they often have wildly different reasons, and those reasons differ from day to day.
I think that from the point of view of U.S. international partners and indeed adversaries, thinking about the international system, what this says to them is that there isn't any coherent U.S. picture of what that international system ought to be anymore, except for some kind of a system in which everybody defers to Donald Trump, everybody defers to the United States.
We're in a situation where in some ways it is even worse, perhaps, than just sheer naked self-interest, because it's naked self-interest combined with a degree of whimsicality, which means that even if something looks to be in U.S. government interest, you have no idea of whether or not the U.S. government is going to shoot off its own foot. And this means that, in a sense, it becomes even more problematic, even more difficult to predict what your relations with this party are going to be like.
Yomiuri: Why was Japan the first country to negotiate directly with the United States following Trump's 90-day suspension of reciprocal tariffs?
Farrell: It appears to be more linked to his [Trump's] particular preferences and to any broader theory of how it might be strategically advantageous to negotiate with this partner ahead of that partner that doesn't.
There usually is a lot of discussion internally … Like every country, they're trying to maximize their negotiating leverage. So it might help to work with one country before another. This does not seem to be an administration like that.
If you're looking at this from the perspective of Vietnam, for example … Vietnam has, in some ways, tried to move closer to the United States over the last number of years than you might have expected, given both its history and its proximity to China. And clearly, from Vietnam's perspective, there is a certain amount of hedging going on, given the part of the world that it is in.
But Vietnam is faced with the question, if you are on the one hand … dealing with an extremely erratic country that doesn't seem to have your interests at heart. And if you're dealing on the other hand with a rather predictable country that also doesn't seem to have your interests at heart, sometimes it can make better sense to go with the more predictable country, because you have less chaos associated with it.
And especially given the really quite extraordinary amount of tariffs that were imposed upon Vietnam.
I think that the local questions that Japan has is whether some of the traditionally difficult relations it has had with neighbors, such as South Korea, may be less important in a world in which the two have a significant degree of common interest. If you're thinking about this from the point of view of exporting powers which have a significant reliance upon high technology of one sort or another, there's actually quite a lot in common in interest between Japan and South Korea and indeed, to that matter, Taiwan.
I do wonder whether, if you're in a world where your sponsor is becoming less predictable, you want to start building up a lot more informal ties very quickly, and figuring out what are the common areas that you can work together on, where you cannot necessarily rely upon the U.S. as much as you used to anymore, it is much more of an unknown quantity.
I think that Japan has … if you see an increased move by countries which are still, to some extent, committed to something like the previous trade regime, here you can think about the European Union. You can also think about Canada, perhaps Australia. If there are moves by these countries, as there appear to be, to try to build up a deeper set of ties among themselves, should Japan become more integrated into them, and to what, how might that negatively affect its relationship with the United States under the current administration.
Equally, it's not impossible that we're going to see a real economic substantial downturn happening in the United States as a result of what's happening.
And that could also really change the strategic situation for Japan quite quickly as well.
I really think we are in extremely chaotic times. It is extremely hard to predict what is going to happen in the world in three months, six months, nine months [or] a year. And it could be that Japan finds itself suddenly in a quite different position … although ambition suggests that there's a goal.
Henry Farrell
Farrell is a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. Born in Ireland, Farrell is an expert in the international political economy. The co-author of 'Underground Empire: How America Weaponized the World Economy,' Farrell has also contributed to U.S. and European media outlets such as The New York Times.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Nikkei Asia
2 hours ago
- Nikkei Asia
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, US court rules
(Reuters) -- A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower-court decision blocking them on grounds that he had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico.


Yomiuri Shimbun
2 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Trump Tariffs May Remain in Effect While Appeals Proceed, US Appeals Court Rules
Reuters file photo U.S. President Donald Trump holds a chart next to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick as Trump delivers remarks on tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 2, 2025. June 10 (Reuters) – A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower-court decision blocking them on grounds that he had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his 'Liberation Day' tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico. The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the duties to remain in place while the appeals play out. The Federal Circuit said the litigation raised issues of 'exceptional importance' warranting the court to take the rare step of having the 11-member court hear the appeal, rather than have it go before a three-judge panel first. It scheduled arguments for July 31. The tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature, have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. The ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as duties on steel and aluminum imports. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term pause. The May 28 ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties, and the other by 12 U.S. states led by Oregon. Jeffrey Schwab, an attorney for the small businesses that sued, said Tuesday's federal appeals court decision was disappointing, but it did not mean that the Trump administration would win in the end. 'It's important to note that every court to rule on the merits so far has found these tariffs unlawful, and we have faith that this court will likewise see what is plain as day: that IEEPA does not allow the president to impose whatever tax he wants whenever he wants,' Schwab said Tuesday. The White House and state of Oregon did not immediately respond to requests for comment after normal business hours on Tuesday. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at U.S. borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all U.S. trading partners imposed in April were a response to the U.S. trade deficit. The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long U.S. practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, D.C., also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.


Yomiuri Shimbun
2 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
‘Come and Get Me': Gavin Newsom Has Entered the Meme War
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has found himself in the center of the internet's spotlight after squaring off with President Donald Trump on social media over the deployment of military troops to counter protesters in Los Angeles. While police deployed tear gas and shot at protesters in Los Angeles with rubber bullets on Monday, Newsom shared a screenshot on TikTok of a Washington Post headline reporting that California would sue Trump over the National Guard's presence, paired with a trending sound sampled from the movie 'Mean Girls. ' The video was captioned 'We will not stand while Donald Trump illegally federalizes the National Guard' and was liked more than 255,000 times. In another video, posted Friday to X, Newsom talks right into a phone camera with the attached message: 'Let's do a simple Econ 101 lesson for @realDonaldTrump.' That post grabbed 1.7 million views. Newsom's clapbacks catapulted to meme status as posters on the left and the right devoured each new beat in the Newsom-Trump showdown. During the back and forth, Newsom grew his TikTok following by almost 50 percent, to 897,000 as of Tuesday, and gained 60,000 new followers on X. While Newsom didn't ask for the military response in L.A. that ignited tension with the president over the weekend, he responded to the sudden attention with internet-savvy posts that borrow strategies from professional creators, such as speaking straight to camera, shooting vertically and using trending sounds on TikTok to reach more viewers. Audiences responded with Newsom-related memes of their own, introducing his political persona to throngs of young people online. In a political economy that's increasingly beholden to the incentives and payoffs of social media, political experts say Newsom's online strategy could rally support for his position on the L.A. protests and bolster his profile among younger, more online voters. 'This sort of meme-posting with clever comments back and forth probably isn't helpful with swing voters, but it could be effective at making him more popular among Democrats,' said Jon Ladd, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University. Before police clashed with protesters during anti-ICE demonstrations on Saturday, Newsom was already taking aim at Trump on social media over the president's alleged plans to cancel federal funding to California. But the tone between Newsom and Trump grew more aggressive as the president deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles over the weekend. Newsom took to his official gubernatorial TikTok account on Sunday to announce he would sue the Trump administration over the deployment, which he called illegal and chaotic. The post, which has been viewed more than 8 million times, was set to the hip-hop song 'Sticky' by Tyler The Creator and included a meme with the words 'f – around' and 'find out.' Comments on the post expressed shock and delight that the governor, known as a moderate Democrat, would share something so tongue-in-cheek and antagonistic. After Trump's border czar Tom Homan said in an interview with NBC on Sunday that he wouldn't rule out arresting elected officials including Newsom if they 'harbor illegal aliens' or defy law enforcement, Newsom again shot back on TikTok: 'Come and get me, tough guy. I don't give a damn,' his personal account shared alongside a clip of the governor speaking about Homan's comments. Meanwhile, Trump and his allies attacked Newsom on Truth Social and other platforms. 'The very incompetent 'Gov.,' Gavin Newscum, and 'Mayor,' Karen Bass, should be saying, 'THANK YOU, President Trump, YOU ARE SO WONDERFUL. WE WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT YOU, SIR,' Trump wrote Monday in a Truth post that got 52,000 likes. Right-wing media networks boosted the clash, with Valuetainment Media owner Patrick Bet-David using his popular YouTube channel to criticize Newsom – and promote his company's branded flip flop sandals, 'for Newsom, who's flip-flopping.' Newsom, who will run for reelection in November, could benefit from the attention generated by a public feud with Trump even if it puts him and his constituents in the administration's crosshairs, said Karen North, a professor of digital social media at the University of Southern California. Newsom's approval ratings are already surging among potential voters in California from 44 percent in October to 52 percent in March, according to data from the Public Policy Institute of California. Feuds, meanwhile, are known to funnel attention toward online influencers, from YouTube gossipmongers to internet-era celebrities such as the Kardashians. The same holds true for politicians, said North, who increasingly style themselves after popular online creators in hopes of building a brand that resonates with voters. 'Newsom's approach to this extremely contentious situation creates an opportunity for him to lock horns with Donald Trump, but he's not doing it in the standard manner of having a hard, flat negotiation, rather in a way that plays to the shareability of social media,' she said. Thanks to algorithmic feeds that prize outrageous material and must-share content, memes travel faster than messaging, North said. To win elections or even solve serious political conflicts such as the Los Angeles showdown, politicians such as Newsom now drum up support by feeding into trending narratives online, she added. They also rely more on new media channels such as podcasts and video talk shows that share clips on social media – which Trump's digital strategists leveraged successfully in the 2024 election. Beyond the news media, there's a second ecosystem of online takes and commentary that's often more powerful than traditional channels for communicating with constituents, North said, and political figures are eager to break in. Representatives for Newsom didn't respond to a request for comment on his recent posting. Even the most fervent online meme-ing doesn't always translate to political success. In the lead-up to the 2024 presidential election, spectators awed at the popularity of Kamala Harris memes on TikTok, which is known for its younger audience. At the polls, however, the coconut memes and 'Brat summer' edits didn't tip the scales in her favor.