Brussels’ zero-for-zero tariff offer not enough, U.S. president says, but indicates he’s open to a deal if the bloc commits to closing the trade deficit in goods.

Summary

Trump has rejected the EU’s “zero-for-zero” tariff offer on cars and industrial goods, demanding instead that the bloc commit to purchasing $350 billion of American energy to offset the trade deficit.

Following his implementation of 20% tariffs on EU goods last week, which triggered significant market downturns, Trump indicated openness to negotiations while emphasizing his “America First” stance.

He also criticized EU product standards as “non-monetary barriers” designed to block American exports.

  • Monument@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    37·
    5 days ago

    Wait, wait, wait.

    Trump, under the direction of parties unknown, is trying to force the EU to buy U.S. energy resources, and that’s the linchpin of his trade war with them?

    Is he trying to give Europe a nudge back to Russian oil supplies?

    • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.eeEnglish
      20·
      5 days ago

      If you’re a (western) European leader returning to Russian energy is at best shortsighted amnesia, at worst blatant malfeasance. There’s several reasons to not go back to Russia:

      • Official legal based sanctions on Russian energy
      • Ukrainian drone based ‘sanctions’ on Russian energy
      • Russia’s track record of energy blackmail/hybrid warfare
      • LNG and oil production available in your EEZ/the EU, albeit at higher cost than imported
      • Domestic solar, hydro, and wind manufacturing/generation is ramping up
      • French nuclear energy exports
      • Domestic politics ie. voters turning against Russian imperial aggression/expansionism

      Eastern Europe has a slightly different incentive mix, but there’s still a lot of reasons to not

      • Wrrzag@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        4 days ago

        Most of these are not really a problem though, even less for the kind of psychos that run the EU. Sanctions can be lifted, and Ukraine shouldn’t be able to do much against both Russia and the EU. While renewables and nuclear are increasing, Russian energy could help until they are 100% ready. Voters won’t do much if they are told “see, the US is trying to scam us, and in these trying times we’ve struck a deal with Russia and you’ll be paying less for power and heat”.

        The problem with striking a deal with Russia is that it’s not the most reliable partner right now (your 3rd point), but the people in charge can ignore the rest and have no problems sleeping.

        Edit: this is not a defense of Russia but a critique of the powers that be in the EU.

        • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.eeEnglish
          5·
          5 days ago

          Commit to renewables. I’d advocate for a nuclear powered off-ramp from fossils whilst renewable capacity and infrastructure is built, but I get that each nation has its own history with fission.

          Energy security is fundamental for a robust society and economy - otherwise you’re subject to pipeline shutoffs/attacks, oil embargoes/quotas, or another angle for outside nations to influence or control you. For example, if you’re chill with the French and build your economic strategy around buying their surplus energy, that strategy predicated on the French having a surplus to sell you.