By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The proposed tariffs on Canadian and Mexican goods by Trump may be in violation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which he himself signed in 2019. This agreement establishes largely tariff-free trade between the three nations. The irony is that Trump, in 2020, lauded the USMCA as the “fairest, most balanced” trade deal ever negotiated. Such tariffs would represent a significant departure from the agreement’s core principles.
Read the original article here
Trump’s proposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico raise serious questions about his commitment to the USMCA trade agreement he signed in 2019. The very notion of imposing these tariffs directly contradicts the spirit, and potentially the letter, of the agreement. It suggests a pattern of disregard for previously established international accords, prioritizing short-term political gains over long-term economic stability and international cooperation.
The argument that these tariffs “may” violate the agreement is an understatement; it’s difficult to see how they wouldn’t. The USMCA, intended to replace NAFTA, aimed to foster a mutually beneficial trade relationship among the three nations. Imposing tariffs directly undermines that core objective, creating trade barriers and potentially triggering retaliatory measures, harming all involved parties.
Furthermore, this apparent disregard for the agreement casts a shadow on Trump’s credibility and leadership. He initially took credit for the USMCA, presenting it as a triumph of his negotiating skills. To now seemingly disregard its provisions suggests either a profound lack of understanding of the agreement’s intricacies or a cynical willingness to abandon commitments for personal or political advantage. The perceived lack of accountability only reinforces the impression of a disregard for established norms and international relationships.
The lack of surprise surrounding this potential violation is perhaps the most telling aspect of the situation. The pattern of behavior, characterized by a seeming disregard for agreements and established procedures, has become so ingrained that reactions of shock or disbelief are replaced with resignation or cynicism. This demonstrates a broader erosion of trust in the consistency and reliability of US foreign policy under such leadership.
One might argue that the “may” in the phrasing “may violate” reflects a cautious legal interpretation, avoiding definitive accusations until a thorough legal analysis is conducted. However, the overwhelming consensus among commentators suggests the violation is blatant and intentional. The context of Trump’s past actions and statements only bolsters this viewpoint.
It’s not merely a matter of breaking a trade agreement. The potential violation of the USMCA showcases a deeper pattern of disregard for international law and agreements. This behavior casts a long shadow, affecting not only economic relations but also the trust and credibility of the United States in the global arena. The potential repercussions extend beyond immediate economic consequences, potentially damaging long-term diplomatic relationships.
The very act of imposing tariffs directly contradicts the stated goals of the USMCA, a document he proudly presented as a landmark achievement. The irony is not lost on observers – that the individual responsible for negotiating and celebrating this trade deal now seems prepared to effectively dismantle it with unilateral actions. This inconsistency further fuels skepticism and uncertainty about the predictability of US foreign policy.
In conclusion, while the legal interpretation of the tariffs’ impact on the USMCA might require detailed analysis, the perception of a clear violation is widespread. The lack of surprise and the pattern of disregard for previous agreements paint a concerning picture of a leader prioritizing personal gain or political strategy over adherence to international commitments and the stability of existing economic partnerships. The entire episode highlights concerns about the consistency and reliability of US foreign policy under leadership that shows a tendency towards unilateral actions and disregard for established agreements. Ultimately, the potential violation of the USMCA serves as a cautionary tale about the consequences of prioritizing short-term gains over long-term commitments, highlighting the risks of eroding trust in international agreements and institutions.