As trade tensions mount between the European Union and the United States under President Donald Trump’s administration, the bloc has assessed its strategy against his trade threats and tariffs. Over time, various governments have adopted divergent approaches to Trump’s aggressive trade tactics, and the EU is no exception in plotting its course amidst these complexities.
Historically, nations like China have retaliated robustly against President Trump’s tariffs, persuading him to backtrack on some of his decisions. Canada too has employed a retaliatory stance, managing to mitigate the trade wounds inflicted by the U.S. Conversely, the United Kingdom swiftly struck a deal favouring the U.S., which serves as an entirely different approach that the EU cannot emulate.
The European Union, comprising 27 member states, finds itself in a distinctive position. Unlike China, which operates under an autocratic regime, the EU lacks the ability to outmaneuver Trump directly. The geopolitical leverage enjoyed by the U.S. grants it a significant advantage termed “escalation dominance.” The stakes are high for the EU; a backward step from the U.S. could mean jeopardizing vital support for Ukraine, leading to severe implications for the EU’s security framework.
On the other hand, the EU cannot draw direct parallels with Canada. The Canadian populace’s strident opposition to Trump’s perceived blackmail stratergy earned Ottawa a stronger negotiating position. Similarly, although anti-Trump sentiments are prevalent across the EU, the presence of political factions within member states that resonate with his ideologies complicates matters, as evidenced by Poland’s elections.
Moreover, the economic dynamics are compelling. The EU engages in trade valued seven times higher than that between the U.S. and the UK, suggesting that Washington has more at stake should relations sour.
Amidst this intricate trade landscape, the European Union’s strategy appears to favour a temperate approach. Rather than escalating tensions or yielding to pressure, the EU is maintaining a steady course and is poised for negotiation should President Trump moderate his demands. This measured tactic may afford the EU additional time, especially in its commitments to support Ukraine significantly, granting it the necessary bandwidth to prepare its own aid package.
In anticipation of shifting circumstances, the EU is subtly positioning itself to benefit should President Trump’s vulnerabilities come to light over time. Recent developments highlight a rolling pattern of disputes, such as the rift with Elon Musk, and the fragility of the U.S.-China trade ceasefire, all of which could diminish Trump’s aggressiveness towards the EU. A Supreme Court ruling could further handicap Trump’s ability to impose tariffs, weakening his bargaining stance. Escalating tariffs could become a double-edged sword, potentially inflicting greater pain on the U.S. economy, disrupting growth and spiking inflation.
As of now, President Trump has imposed a series of tariffs affecting diverse imports from the EU, with current tariffs standing at 50% for U.S. steel and aluminum imports, 25% for cars, and an additional 10% across most other goods. Amidst this pressure cooker, President Trump has extended a July 9 deadline for negotiation regarding increasing reciprocal tariffs up to 50%, spotlighting further potential sectoral tariffs aimed at pharmaceuticals and semiconductors.
In response, the EU has filed complaints with the World Trade Organization (WTO) yet has held off on retaliatory measures thus far. Consensually, EU negotiators anticipate limited success in overturning reciprocal tariffs but remain firmly focused on avoiding additional punitive measures in specific sectors that could gravely impact its economy.
In a quest for resolution, the EU has floated the idea of purchasing increased amounts of U.S. military equipment and natural gas, indicating a willingness to foster economic ties in a strategic context. Securing such an agreement could enhance the EU’s defense mechanisms while alleviating dependence on Russian energy supplies.
Importantly, the EU retains the prerogative to challenge reciprocal tariffs post-WTO verdict, as articulated by trading expert Ignacio Garcia Bercero. Undeniably, Trump’s administration would encounter a notable concession should such an agreement unfold. The prospective U.S. deficit in goods, which reached a staggering $236 billion in the previous year, could see some rectification through the EU’s expanded purchases.
However, President Trump’s ongoing grievances about the bloc’s value-added tax, food safety standards, and several digital taxes imposed by member states add layers of complexity. Experts like Simon Evenett highlight the difficulty in negotiating concessions on these longstanding points of contention.
Despite the positive framing from recent trade discussions, the risk remains that talks could unravel, prompting the EU to consider its tactics if President Trump escalates his rhetoric and tariffs. Thus far, the EU has refrained from retaliating. While it has announced a tax equivalent to €21 billion on U.S. imports pertaining to previous tariffs, actual implementation is postponed until July 14, reflecting its desire for a constructive dialogue. Additionally, discussions are ongoing regarding a further €95 billion worth of retorsive taxes concerning automotive tariffs and reciprocity.
Cumulatively, the proposed tariffs would amount to only one-third of the considerable €379 billion worth of EU imports subjected to Trump’s tariffs, suggesting that the EU’s bargaining power is somewhat limited.
Some analysts are advocating for a more hardline posture to strengthen the EU’s response. Ideas range from tightening regulations on American service sectors, in which the U.S. enjoyed a €109 billion surplus with the EU, to invoking the “anti-coercion instrument,” which could penalize U.S. entities operating within European territories. There is also potential for an extreme measure such as banning exports of critical goods, particularly lithographic equipment essential for semiconductor production.
While the landscape is ever-evolving, the current consensus leans towards a calm and calculated response from the EU. It must recognize both its vulnerabilities, as well as its leverage position, while remaining mindful of its broader objectives and responsibilities, particularly regarding support for Ukraine in its tumultuous geopolitical landscape.
image source from：https://www.breakingviews.com/columns/big-view/eu-can-play-it-cool-with-trumps-trade-threats-2025-06-09/
