Are America’s tariffs here to stay?

the economists. One of our reasons we. thought that there would be a massive. trade war by now was we expected more. retaliation and I was actually talking. to some of your counterparts, trade. negotiators for other countries. One of. their points is that you have been. brutally, shockingly successful this. year. They didn't expect your tariffs to. be so broad, so fast, so ruthless, and. that they realized they just could not. and will not retaliate. But. you know the president now links this to. you know everything from how much water.

comes out the Rio Grande agreement with. Mexico to you know fentinel from China. it's clearly about so much more than. trade which raises the question if it's. this powerful a weapon and it clearly is. everyone's reeling are they ever meant. to go away. >> so I would say well let me make two. points the the first one is the use of. tariffs in the geopolitical context. which you've raised and and I find this. discussion interesting because we've. seen a lot of you know pearl clutching. over this and use of tariffs and I just.

am surprised a little bit because the. United States for decades has used. financial sanctions uh in response to. geopolitical events whether it's human. rights or conflict prevention or other. you know core issues for the United. States and when you impose a financial. sanction you essentially cut off a. country a firm an individual a business. from the global financial system it's a. very. >> you you impose sanction When you say. someone's broken the law is like. smuggling weapons of mass destruction, the tariffs is like in other situations.

>> You displeased President Trump. He. boasts of he says you can slap tariffs. on macro in France. Posted about it. >> Well, let let me finish my thought. So. on on the sanctions, you know, for years. the United States has imposed sanctions. on firms, countries, and individuals. And it's not just Iran, right? It's, you. know, there are people in Israel, people. in Mexico, there are people in. Switzerland. Right? There are. individuals, firms, countries, and. companies who have become subject to. sanctions for a variety of reasons. And. it's not just smuggling nuclear things. It's smuggling dual use goods. It's.

trafficking drugs. I mean, we have a. long history of imposing sanctions for. trafficking drugs. So, when the. president comes and he says, well, instead of completely cutting off a. country or a company or a person, I'm. just going to impose a fee, which is a. lesser measure. That's actually a more. moderate use of of a sanction authority. Um, and I I your other question as to. well, can we, you know, are we ever. really going to count on what we can do. with America? There are kind of two ways to do it, right? You have you have the other. extreme, which is what we've suffered.

under for 30 years, which is here's the. World Trade Agreement. Here's World. Trade Organization agreements. Here's. NAFTA. Here are these other trade. agreements, and they're set in stone, and they will never change. Even if it. leads to offshoring of America, even if. it means manufacturing lossing, even if. it means that China becomes the biggest. manufacturer in United States, it's a. suicide pack and we have to stick to it. That's crazy, right? That is a recipe. for losing your sovereignty and your. economic vitality. And we can't have. that. Now, on the other extreme, you. have a situation where you say, "Well, we never know what's going to happen.

We'll have no rules." And we can't have. either of these things. I mean, what we. have now, we have the WTO system and. we've layered on top of that a variety. of agreements and a mix of tariffs and. other measures to correct for a lot of. issues that the WTO has let fester or. hasn't fixed. And so that's what we have. now. Now, I don't think every problem. has been resolved, >> but to quote literally one of your. counterparts, to me, it's about so much. more than trade problems, right? Some of. this stuff is clearly about pure. political disagreements that is, you.

know, the American government doesn't. like what someone's doing. And he said. to me, I think this is never meant to. end. The fear is the point. Is that. right? >> Well, I would say I would say that. there's value in uncertainty. This goes. back to the word we talked about and not. uncertainty as to what's the tariff rate. going to be, but uncertainty as to no. one has a right to the US market. Nobody. does. >> Countries that consider themselves old. good friends of America, they are not. impressed by what is happening, right? They don't respect uh they understand.

the the the domestic mandate. They take. seriously I think the the anger of the. American public that they get, but they. think that the the methods, the. uncertainty, the bullying, the the. mixing of trade with geopolitics in. these tariffs, the the kind of the glee. with which the president, you know, changes his mind and imposes these. tariffs. They don't respect that. They. don't like that. They are very angry. That's what I hear sometimes from people. literally who sit across the table. Do. they say that to you? Does that come. across in your meetings with them?

>> They don't say that to me. I'm like a. super nice guy. But I I will say first. of all, you kind of use this word, you. know, they're not impressed. Like if. people don't understand, we're not. trying to impress anybody. Here's who. we're trying to impress. The American. voter and the American worker. For us, trade policy is almost more domestic. policy than it is foreign policy. We're. trying to fix a problem that American. policy makers made in the past. I mean, President Trump himself when he. interacts with foreign leaders, he tells. them all the time, I don't blame you for.

your trade practices. I blame American. policy makers. And I'm in a lot of. meetings and calls with world leaders. and President Trump. And the meetings. are quite gracious, right? I mean, you. know, people kind of latch on to some. explosive meeting they see on TV with. Zilinsky or something like that. But in. nearly every meeting I've been in with. President Trump, it's been quite. constructive. I try to be as. communicative as possible. And I'm. convinced that the rest of the. administration does the same thing. U. you know, President Trump has great. relationships with his counterparts. And. I agree with you. My my my guess is.

there are a bunch of second or third. tier career bureaucrats in all of these. countries who have spent decades having. their own protectionist measures against. American goods and services. And now. they see that's being undermined. And. they don't like that. They like the old. system. And I'm almost certain that. they're over there saying, "Well, we. don't like this anymore." That may be. the case, but we all live in the real. world. And in the real world, uh, we. need to change our terms of trade to. protect our domestic manufacturing. That's what we're doing. And we've been. doing a really constructive way through. deals, not through retaliation, but.

through negotiation. And we're we've. achieved a lot of great success. And. we've been able to keep good relations. with a lot of these folks. The sobering. lesson for me of the past year traveling. the world is that countries that really. admired America, respected America, have. very deep relationships across security. alliances with you. They're heartbroken. by how they're treated by your. administration and they are wondering. how to make themselves less dependent on.

you because they are not willing to put. up with this in the long term. Their. their vision is not kind of peevishness. It's your government is spending capital. earned over decades and they are just. heartbroken. >> Well, were they heartbroken when they. were dumping all kinds of goods at the. American market and putting our guys out. of business? Were they heartbroken when. our factories were leaving the Midwest. and setting up shop in Vietnam or. Mexico? Were they heartbroken when we. had all this fentanyl coming in killing.

Americans? Were they heartbroken then? Were they heartbroken then? I don't. think they were. So, I take all of that. and I think fine. But right now, I'm. elected, you know, the president's. elected and I'm appointed to worry about. Americans. I'm not super worried about. the feelings of people overseas who took. advantage of American policy makers for. a long time who decided to just have. open markets with no conditions, more or. less. We are very happy to see other. countries succeed. And we believe that. the rest of the world is better off when. America has a strong manufacturing base.

And when America can be an arsenal for. the world, we believe the world is. better off in that situation. And. frankly, in my conversations with a lot. of my trading partners, they understand. that and they have their own. re-industrialization they're trying to. do, especially in some of the developed. economies. And I understand that. So, you know, when when I think about, you. know, heartbroken stuff, I'm worried. about the families torn apart in middle. America because they've lost a factory. that's the anchor of a community. That's. who I'm worried about. And I and I am. sure that French or Swedish or Mexican.

leaders are worried about their own. people and they should be. And we. shouldn't be bound to these agreements. of the past that are 30, 40, 50 years. old in some cases and say, "Listen, even. though this has led to China being the. world's manufacturer, we just have to. live with it. otherwise we'll all be. heartbroken. I just think that's I don't. think that's the way to do it. I think. we have to consistently review our trade. relationships with these countries and. other aspects of our relationships and. adjust them for me to be good for. America for them to be good for the EU.

or Saudi Arabia or Australia or whoever. it is. And listen, power comes into play. and raw power comes into play. Who has. leverage? Who doesn't? And my job is to. worry about America and Americans. And. if we can bring our friends and allies. along with us, we will.