Trump embraces economic coercion with tariffs as his big stick
Trump just dinged India with a 25% tariff rate — higher than many other Asian nations, though he's leaving the door open for last-minute haggling. He cited New Delhi's own trade barriers, but rebuked Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government over lots of other things too — including its BRICS membership, and close ties with Russia. "They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care,' he posted on social media.
Trump is taking punitive tariff threats beyond the realm of trade and into other arenas — ramping up pressure on countries to bend to America's will, on matters from war to energy supplies. Trump road-tested the hardball tactic in his first term. Now he's taken it to new levels.
The U.S. spent years accusing its chief superpower rival China of practicing "economic coercion' — a label that precisely describes what Trump is doing now. And from his perspective, it's working — especially with allies that depend on the U.S. for military protection. He's gotten the European Union, Japan and South Korea to meekly accept lopsided tariff terms, and customs revenue is pouring in.
Whether all this will deliver a "golden age' for the U.S. economy — which has slowed since Trump took office — remains to be seen. So does the longer-term fallout for America's relationships with partners.
India is far from the only case where Trump is wielding trade weapons for unrelated issues. He fired a shot across Mark Carney's bow after the Canadian prime minister said Wednesday that Canada plans to recognize a Palestinian state — in defiance of Israel and its chief backer, the U.S.
"Wow!' Trump responded on social media. "That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them.'
Trump said Thursday that the U.S. will put a 35% tariff on some imports from Canada after trade negotiations between the two countries broke down. The new rate represents an increase from the 25% tariffs Trump imposed in early March under an emergency law.
'Full power'
While they call it leverage rather than coercion, Trump's team hasn't been shy about using America's economic and military might to extract concessions from allies and adversaries alike.
"We've never had a president who wields the full power of the United States to negotiate good deals for our country,' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Thursday. "This is what maximum leverage looks like.' Stephen Miran, one of Trump's top economic aides, said earlier this month that since the U.S. has the world's biggest consumer market, it can force other countries to accept the cost of tariffs.
Trump has backed away from some of his harsher tariff threats, and at other times he's set deadlines only to extend them — like he just did with Mexico — or indicate that bargaining can stretch past the cutoff date.
Perhaps his most brazen intervention came during the BRICS summit in Brazil earlier this month. Trump first blasted the 10-member group's "anti-American policies' and threatened additional tariffs on any country aligning themselves with BRICS. Then he singled out the host nation, without so much as the pretense of addressing trade issues.
Trump said he'd impose 50% tariffs on Brazil after demanding that it cease a "Witch Hunt' against his ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro, and criticizing steps taken against U.S. social media companies — matters that are the prerogative of Brazil's judiciary, not its government. He backtracked somewhat this week, allowing multiple exemptions and giving Brazil an extra week before the maximum tariff rate kicks in.
Trump has given most U.S. partners until Aug. 1 to cough up or suffer additional tariffs, and there's been a flurry of trade agreements — often barely more than frameworks — hashed out ahead of the deadline.
Under Trump's pressure, the European Union declined to use its trade heft and signed up to terms that were subsequently denounced by German and French industry. The Europeans were acutely aware that they still depend on the U.S. for weapons and security in the face of Russia's aggression in Ukraine.
The pressure was there for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer too, when he traveled to not one but two Trump golf courses in Scotland last weekend to try and pin down the details of the U.K.'s framework deal of a few weeks earlier. He instead got a lecture on how British immigration was too lax, North Sea oil taxes were too high, and the U.K. was misguided to seek clean energy.
Popular resistance
To be sure, the U.S. has been applying economic pressures to get its diplomatic way since long before Trump entered politics. Successive presidents have piled on thousands of sanctions over the last couple of decades.
Still, there's something new in Trump's approach. He's questioned the utility of sanctions — which can cut access to dollar-based finance, but risk a backlash against the greenback's global status, something Trump vows to protect. Instead, his weapon of choice is essentially the U.S. consumer. He's betting that other countries can't get by without selling stuff into the world's biggest economy.
So far he can point to some significant successes. His tariffs are bringing in billions for the U.S. Treasury. Despite dire warnings from critics, the U.S. economy hasn't tanked — though there's been a marked slowdown this year — and the stock market, Trump's preferred gauge of sentiment, is setting fresh records.
Meanwhile, only China has retaliated to tariffs in hardball style so far. Mexico has also pushed back to an extent, and got a reward on Thursday when Trump postponed tariff hikes for 90 days.
There's been some resistance from Brazil and Canada too — and it's proved popular at home in both cases.
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva appears to be reaping the benefit of holding firm. He got a polling boost ahead of elections, while the U.S. exempted key Brazilian goods from the tariffs. Carney enjoys wide support for his opposition to the more egregious of Trump's charges.
A broad if provisional conclusion from the upheavals of the past few months might be that Trump-style coercion gets results within the U.S.-led bloc, the jury's still out when it comes to large neutral countries like India and Brazil, and it may be less effective with adversaries.
China, for instance, hit back hard with curbs on its sales of rare-earth elements — which are vital to advanced U.S. industries. Trump rapidly dialed back his highest China tariffs, as well as some export restrictions, and the countries have reached a kind of truce with talks ongoing.
Equally, Trump's demands for a ceasefire in Ukraine haven't had much impact on Vladimir Putin. Trump's given him a deadline of Aug. 8 to strike a deal or face more economic pressure. There's no sign that this is affecting Moscow's conduct of the war, and the Russian army continues to advance.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NHK
33 minutes ago
- NHK
Japan minimum wage could top 1,000 yen across country
A Japanese government panel has agreed to a record increase in the minimum wage. The hourly rate is likely to top 1,000 yen, or about 6.80 dollars, across the country. A labor ministry panel on Monday met with representatives of labor and management. The panel recommended a minimum wage for each prefecture. They agreed to increases in the current fiscal year that bring the average hourly rate up by 63 yen to 1,118 yen, or about 7.60 dollars. Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru said he would do his utmost to realize wage increases for the people, and show that this is the central pillar of growth strategies. Ishiba added the government will continue to implement all possible policies to raise wages. The increase is larger than last fiscal year's, and exceeds 60 yen for the first time. This is the fourth fiscal year in a row that the increase has set a new record. The government aims to increase the national average minimum wage to 1,500 yen, or about 10 dollars, by the end of fiscal 2029. That would mean a jump from the current level of at least 445 yen. The minimums agreed to by the panel will be finalized after management and labor unions hold talks with advisory panels and prefectural labor bureaus.
6 hours ago
Energy from the North? Japan Eyes the Promise and Perils of Alaskan Gas Investment
Among the barrage of executive orders that US President Donald Trump issued upon taking office in January 2025 is one titled Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential, which proclaims the need to tap the state's natural resources, including liquefied natural gas, to rein in inflation, create jobs, correct trade imbalances, boost America's global clout, and counter moves by foreign powers to weaponize energy supplies. In conjunction with this policy, the Trump administration is urging Japan—under pressure from tough tariff negotiations—to invest in the Alaska LNG project, a costly plan to pipe gas across the state, liquefy it, and ship it to East Asian countries. Liquefied natural gas has a long history in Alaska. Japan's very first imports of LNG, back in 1969, were shipped from the state. But apart from the name, the Alaska LNG project being pushed by the White House has very little in common with its predecessor. Under the earlier plan, natural gas was extracted from reserves on the Kenai Peninsula on the south coast of Alaska, where it was processed into LNG and loaded onto ships for export. Total capacity was only about 1.5 million tons a year. Beginning in 2015, global LNG prices dropped as supplies increased and demand weakened, and it became increasingly difficult for Alaska to compete with other suppliers. In 2017, Alaska LNG's operations were shut down. The new Alaska LNG development project proposes to tap the North Slope gas fields on the Arctic Ocean coast in northern Alaska. A 1,300-kilometer trans-Alaska pipeline would transport the gas all the way down to the Kenai Peninsula, where chilling facilities would produce up to 20 million tons of LNG annually. Alaska Gasline Development Corp. (AGDC), the independent public corporation heading up the project (including construction of a natural-gas pipeline and liquefaction plant) hopes to begin shipping LNG around 2030. Alaska depends heavily on locally extracted natural gas for its own heating and industrial purposes, and the Kenai Peninsula's gas reserves have been dwindling, with supplies expected to run out sometime in the mid-2030s. For the state, therefore, development of the North Slope fields promises a new source of affordable energy for Alaskans, as well as significant revenue from exports. LNG Demand in East Asia In February 2025, the Japanese government released its Seventh Strategic Energy Plan, which calculates the outlook for energy supply and demand in 2040. Alongside its basic energy outlook, the plan incorporates an alternative scenario in which the official targets for adoption of nonfossil fuels (such as renewable energy and hydrogen) are not met. If the goals are achieved, demand for LNG in fiscal 2040 is expected to drop from the current level of 66 million tons (fiscal 2022) to somewhere between 54 million and 60 million tons. If the country falls short of the targets, though, it will need an estimated 74 million tons of LNG. In short, a certain level of demand for LNG is expected to persist through 2040. In the interim, the long-term contracts under which Japanese utilities and trading companies purchase LNG are coming up for renewal. New contracts will have to be signed to ensure a stable energy supply farther down the road, and Alaska LNG is one potential supplier. South Korea and Taiwan are in a similar position. Much like Japan, South Korea can only guess at the amount of energy renewables will be able to supply over the next 10 or 20 years. Taiwan, which shut down its last operating nuclear power plant in May this year, has adopted an energy strategy that calls for converting coal-fired plants to natural gas. All three countries have a clear need for LNG going forward, presenting a business opportunity for Alaska LNG. Geographical Merits Clearly, Alaska LNG enjoys the Trump administration's enthusiastic backing, but what are the relative benefits for Japan and its neighbors? The biggest advantage is probably geographical proximity. Japan already imports LNG from the United States, but those shipments originate in the Gulf of Mexico. The shortest route, through the Panama Canal, is about 17,000 kilometers. Moreover, because congestion has made it difficult for LNG tankers to transit the canal, the preferred route nowadays is around the Cape of Good Hope, a 29,000-kilometer trip. The southern coast of Alaska, by contrast, is only about 6,000 kilometers from Japan. The shorter distance and shipping time would mean lower transportation costs and more flexible delivery schedules. Shipping from Alaska is also attractive from the standpoint of safety of navigation. LNG from Qatar typically passes through the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca before traveling north through the South China Sea. The Strait of Hormuz poses safety risks whenever the situation in the Middle East is unstable, and piracy continues to be an issue in the Strait of Malacca. China's increasingly assertive activity in the South China Sea, most of which it claims as its own territory, makes navigation problematic there. Shipping LNG from Alaska is a way of avoiding these safety risks. Cost Questions Remain But the Alaska LNG plan raises some serious questions centered on costs and lead time. Gas from the North Slope is inexpensive in and of itself, but the construction of a new gas treatment plant on the North Slope, a trans-Alaska pipeline, and a liquefaction plant on the Kenai Peninsula would incur enormous costs. An early estimate by the developer put the total expense at about $44 billion, but inflation has pushed up construction costs since then, and the challenges of laying pipeline through permafrost areas could add significantly to the expense. Any final decision must await a detailed, independent analysis, which will doubtless yield a higher price tag. For purposes of comparison, one might note that total investment in the Rio Grande LNG project, now under construction in Brownsville, Texas, is estimated at roughly $20 billion. To be sure, the two projects differ significantly in terms of the scale of construction and the kinds of expenses involved, but the comparison helps put the cost of the Alaska LNG project in perspective. The high initial investment required augments the challenges of financing the project and could also push up the selling price of the LNG thus produced. Bad Timing? The long lead time required for Alaska LNG to launch commercial operations is problematic on several counts. First, it could affect Alaska LNG's ability to compete with other LNG projects targeting Asian markets, including various US ventures, a Canadian project that began shipping LNG from the Pacific Coast in May 2025, and plans to expand production in Qatar. In short, Asian customers have multiple options for investing in and importing natural gas, and they will only choose Alaska LNG if it suits their needs with respect to timing and terms of sale. This is especially true in Japan, where most of the importers are private companies. In South Korea and Taiwan, where public corporations handle the importation of LNG, political considerations may play some role in purchasing decisions, but even so, buyers will have to decide whether the political benefits are worth the additional costs. Second, under the current timeline, Alaska LNG will not begin exporting until after the end of Trump's second term of office in January 2029. We have witnessed firsthand the policy U-turns that can result when a new president from a different party takes control in Washington. The next administration might well resurrect the environmental protections and climate-change policies that Trump has discarded, a shift that could spell trouble for Alaska LNG. Long-term business decisions require a measure of policy predictability, and in this key respect, the United States has become a high-risk country. The third issue with Alaska LNG's long lead time pertains to the target year for achieving net zero carbon emissions. Demand for LNG from Japanese and other East Asian importers is bound to decline sharply as the 2050 target year approaches. A 20-year LNG contract concluded in 2030 will last through 2049. If long-term contracts are needed to secure funding for the future, then it makes sense to begin export operations as soon as possible. Alaska LNG has very little time to spare. A Narrow Window of Opportunity Plans for tapping the North Slope's natural gas resources have been around for decades, but they have stalled repeatedly in the face of financial and political obstacles. Trump's executive order Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential presents an unprecedented opportunity for the Alaska LNG project. But given Trump's term of office and the looming net-zero deadline, the window of opportunity is narrow. Ultimately, speed and cost will determine whether Alaska LNG can tap into the East Asian market. In terms of speed, the project needs to make concrete progress—meaning a final investment decision and initial construction—soon, while the political winds are still favorable. Otherwise, the project will lose momentum, and the market will be snapped up by competing LNG projects. The importance of cost considerations goes without saying. It would be foolish to overrate the value of Alaska LNG solely on the basis of geography. That said, if Alaska LNG can offer its product at a price comparable to that of competitors, then its geographical location becomes a powerful inducement, vastly increasing its chances of claiming a share of the East Asian market. (Originally published in Japanese on July 25, 2025. Banner photo: A liquefied natural gas tanker arrives at Futtsu Power Station in Futtsu, Chiba Prefecture, in February 2023. © Kyodo.)
NHK
7 hours ago
- NHK
Ishiba to urge Trump to sign order to cut auto tariffs
Japan's Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru says he will do all he can to urge US President Donald Trump to quickly sign an executive order to cut auto tariffs, following last month's agreement between the two countries. The Lower House budget committee debated the bilateral tariff agreement and other issues on Monday, with Ishiba and Japan's top tariff negotiator, Akazawa Ryosei, in attendance. Yamashita Takashi, former justice minister of the main governing Liberal Democratic Party, said the principle of investment rather than tariffs has become the standard for Trump's tariff measures. He cited an agreement between the US and the European Union as one example. Yamashita asked Ishiba to explain the significance of the Japan-US deal. The prime minister said both countries will bring their technology, labor forces and capital together to offer better things to the world, with jobs created in the US and no job losses in Japan. He said it will be a "win-win relationship." Ishiba said some people think that implementing the agreement will be more difficult than reaching it. He asked for continued support. Yamashita referred to an agreement between the ruling and opposition blocs to abolish the provisional gasoline tax rate this year. He asked Ishiba whether he ordered the move as the LDP leader. Ishiba said he did, adding that the government will do all it can to implement the agreement on the tax rate sincerely, steadily and swiftly. The leader of the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, Noda Yoshihiko, said a document was created for the 2019 Japan-US trade agreement, but it was effectively scrapped. He said the Trump administration may stretch the interpretation of the recent bilateral agreement and "keep ripping Japan off" if a document is not produced. Ishiba said the US president is the type of person who changes rules. He said his major concern is that drawing up a document would lead to a delay in tariff cuts. Ishiba said Trump should focus on issuing an executive order to cut auto tariffs, which is most important for national interests. He said he decided not to draw up a document after carefully considering what will be best for Japan. Noda also took up the topic of political reform. He said his party has been calling for banning donations from companies and organizations. Noda said the largest force and the second largest force in the Diet should sincerely discuss the matter, reach a conclusion and ask for support from other parties. He expressed hope that Ishiba will hold talks on the issue with him rather than leaving it to people at the working level to reach an agreement. Ishiba said he will try to discuss essential issues with Noda and share the results with other parties to ensure fairness and prevent money from swaying politics. Ishiba also referred to a message he intends to issue to mark 80 years since the end of World War Two. He said that regardless of the format, it is necessary to release the message to prevent memories from fading and war from breaking out again. Ishiba said he has strong feelings about the issue and will try to draw up a better message that reflects a range of views.
