The tsunami of the duties unleashed by Donald Trump is still far from being understood to the end. After the declaration of war on the universe everything (because it is about this), nobody has understood exactly what the real objective is behind the moves of the US President. An aspect that is far from secondary, because to sketch any type of counter -bend – and the EU will necessarily have to in force something – it is essential to understand what who you are facing in mind.

Trump has put the duties weapon in place to rebalance the US commercial scale (the USA more than they export, especially from Europe: about 350 billion against 580). But it is clear that, in such an interconnected economy, in a world that has been for over thirty years of globalization, the only raising of taxes on the import of goods and services cannot be the solution of all problems. If it were so simple, each state would have long adopted a similar policy. Colombo’s egg (to stay in America) exists only in legends.

Trump’s two needs

Trump’s choice could respond to two different needs. The first is to protect – or show that you protect – your electorate, feeling depleted from globalization (delocalized manufacturing productions where the cost of labor is less, competition of goods at very low cost) and by the open company (arrival of “poor” labor from abroad, which has contributed to lowering the wages of the Americans). Raising cheap barriers is like raising walls: isolating yourself means cutting bridges with the world. In certain moments, for a frightened population, all this can have a pseudo-raping effect.

The second idea behind the duties is to use the commercial lever to put pressure on anyone (European, Canadian, Chinese) and obtain in return what Trump believes for the United States: a greater military commitment (to the Europeans: do you not want the duties? Pay the NATO), new manufacturing policies for the many companies scattered around the world (come to produce in America or stop relocating), and so on.

Who pays the Trump war

A double strategy that represents a turnaround compared to decades of “open” policies, when everyone thought that the freedom of trade and trust in the future were the petrol of global growth – a vision that has however proved to be a bankruptcy partly. The commercial wars have always been harbinger of inflation (which falls on the pockets of citizens), of dangerous bags of stock exchange (shareholders and savers will lose billions), of drastic changes in the consumption habits of ordinary people.

And since citizens, savers, ordinary people are also in America, Trump deludes himself in believing that the whole world will discount the effects of his policies, but not the US voters. The EU will have to offer an adequate response, but it will be their own – the Americans who sent Trump to the White House – to be able to (hope) to make the president change.