Tariff dispute settled - but at what cost?
The EU and the US have settled their tariff dispute: tariffs of 15 percent will apply to most EU exports to the US, and Europe will not impose any new counter-tariffs. On Sunday in Scotland, Donald Trump and Ursula von der Leyen also agreed that the bloc would make massive purchases of energy and defence equipment from the US. The European press comments on different aspects of the deal and draws its own conclusions.
Getting off lightly
Europe had very little leeway in the negotiations, says Český rozhlas:
“It looks like neither Europe, nor Japan, nor probably a significant part of the rest of the world, which has not yet been able to strike a deal with the US, are equal partners that could afford to make the same demands - with the exception of China, where the final agreement is still being worked out and negotiations are ongoing. ... The trade war is in full swing and Europe is getting off lightly. But European producers and exporters will hardly benefit from the agreement because, in a stable world, tariff policy doesn't change on a daily basis, so American tariffs will become the new reality.”
A Pyrrhic victory for the US
This is by no means a clear victory for the US, Les Echos concludes:
“The Commission President could hardly have expected more. And it was better to put a stop to the bidding war announced by the White House. ... Even if some uncertainties still need to be clarified, Brussels has gained assurances for key sectors (the automotive industry, aviation, alcoholic beverages) and has reaffirmed its regulatory principles, particularly in the digital sector. ... Moreover, America's 'victory' should be put into perspective, because we should never forget that everyone loses in this protectionist game - including the US, which will pay for its short-term budget gains with additional inflation and less growth.”
Gain access to other markets
Fortunately, Europe's economy is not solely dependent on the US, Sydsvenskan emphasises:
“The EU must now conclude optimal trade agreements - with partners who trust that free trade with the EU is worthwhile. ... It already took a step in this direction last December with the Mercosur agreement which expands trade with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. This export market already accounts for more than 750,000 jobs in the EU, primarily in the automotive and manufacturing industries. Free trade can create more jobs and allow companies to grow. And this is how Europe can become richer - regardless of who is in the White House.”
In the realm of fantasy
The EU's commitment to purchasing at least 750 billion dollars worth of oil, gas and nuclear fuel from the US over a three-year period is unrealistic, argues Sega:
“The plan for a major energy deal sounds like a fantasy. Not only can the EU not import that much, but US companies cannot produce such large quantities either. Even if this were to happen, it would severely disrupt the flow of energy in the rest of the world. Energy experts quickly calculated that in 2024, the EU purchased liquefied natural gas, oil and coal worth 64.55 billion dollars from the US. This is only a quarter of the 250 billion dollars in annual purchases promised by von der Leyen.”
Revoke the agreement
The EU must not give up its potential as a strong international actor, El País argues:
“The 'agreement' exposes Europe's geopolitical weakness, as already displayed in Ukraine and the Middle East. And now it has also failed to assert its economic clout. ... What's more, it is doing so with a purported partner that has shown itself to be anything but reliable. Europe must not resign itself to insignificance or accept Trump's contempt for multilateralism. It must revoke this agreement, which can hardly even pass as the lesser evil. Otherwise, it would be abandoning the core of the European project and its potential to be a strong international actor: a union committed to a rules-based world order which includes trade rules.”
Brexit has paid off
The Times notes with satisfaction that, thanks to its break with the EU, London was able to secure more favourable terms than Brussels in its own agreement with the US:
“Whereas the bloc will face a 15 per cent general tariff, Britain's is 10 per cent. On steel and aluminium Mr Trump has placed a 50 per cent tariff on the EU, double that applying to imports into the US from Britain. …The most significant factor may have been the UK's position outside of the EU. Endowed with the flexibility to define its own trade policy, London was able to move more swiftly than Brussels to protect its interests.”
High price for stability
This is not a fair deal, writes Corriere della Sera:
“The EU is paying a high price for 'stability' in its relations with the US. ... This is essentially a political agreement: the EU wanted to avoid a head-on conflict with the US. Before Trump, the average tariff imposed by American customs authorities on European goods was around 4.8 percent; now it has been set at 15 percent. This is three times as high and with no real economic justification, because Trump's claim that Europe has been exploiting the US for several years is simply not true.”
Trump took a gamble and won
Fifteen percent can hardly be called a fair result, De Standaard laments:
“Trump took a gamble and won - because he has obstinately rewritten the rules of the game, which were established over decades of multilateral negotiations. Now that these rules have been changed, it is impossible to predict how the new tariffs will affect the US and EU economies. In the old world, US consumers would have paid the price: trade tariffs make life more expensive, stifle innovation and reduce prosperity. In Trump's world, they make the US richer at the expense of its trading partners.”
Worse than hoped for but better than feared
The EU has been forced to bow to Trump's demands, NRC concludes:
“In recent weeks, cracks have become visible in the united front that the EU wanted to present. Countries like Germany and Italy became nervous - they would have a lot to lose if their companies were faced with high tariffs. Others, led by France, were fed up with the threats and believed that the EU needed to take a tougher stance. Seen in this light, the result is one that also allows European diplomats to breathe a sigh of relief. Worse than hoped for but better than feared.”
The weapons are back in their holsters
The Irish Times breathes a sigh of relief:
“The agreement of an outline trade deal between the EU and the US has one main advantage - it avoids an imminent tariffs war between the two sides which could have got nasty. ...This could have developed into a tit-for-tat battle. Now, the gunfight is off and the trade weapons are back in their holsters, at least for a while. Ireland relies heavily on US investment and trade and stood to be particularly exposed if a trade war broke out. Such a scenario could risk drawing big digital tech companies with large operations here into the fallout.”