Trump said the tariff letters are "final agreements," and faced with temptation, he said "willing to dialogue"

On local time on the 14th, US President Trump said, "the letters sent to various countries are the agreement," and stated that the equivalent tariff rates unilaterally announced to major countries including South Korea are the final proposal. Despite this, he still said, "we are always willing to dialogue," implying that there is still a possibility of last-minute negotiations before the next month's 1st, when the tariffs will be officially imposed.

On the same day, President Trump also signed a deal with NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization, abbreviated as "NATO") for the purchase of US-made weapons. NATO said it would purchase a large number of American weapons, and Trump immediately withdrew his previous stance of suspending arms supplies to Ukraine. Analysts believe that this also means he may overturn his previous declaration of the tariff decisions for various countries as "final."

"The letters are the agreement, no room for negotiation"

On the same day, during a meeting at the White House with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, President Trump was asked about the nature of the tariff letters. He replied, "The letters are the agreement," and said, "the agreement has been reached through the sending of the letters, so there is nothing more to negotiate."

Since the 7th, Trump had unilaterally informed South Korea and Japan of 25% equivalent tariffs via his personal social media, then informed Brazil of 50%, Canada of 35%, and the EU and Mexico each of 30% equivalent tariffs, emphasizing that these are the final proposals for tariff negotiations.

Despite this, Trump still said, "they want to reach different types of agreements and hope to dialogue with the United States," emphasizing, "we are always open to dialogue." This move aims to encourage countries to propose more sincere negotiation proposals by highlighting the possibility of retracting previous decisions before the imposition of tariffs.

After proposing "money" conditions, reversing the "suspension of aid" position

On the same day, Trump also changed his position on the war in Ukraine. He not only stated that the United States would provide air defense weapons to Ukraine, which is fighting Russia, but also would provide large-scale offensive weapons. He said, "the United States will produce the most advanced weapons and provide them to NATO," and stated, "according to the agreement signed today, the cost of the weapons will be borne by NATO." This contrasts with his previous negative stance on providing weapons to Ukraine.

Trump also pointed out, "all of this became possible because a month ago I visited The Hague for the NATO summit and they increased their defense spending from 2% of GDP to 5%." He emphasized his "achievements" in this way. At the same time, he reiterated, "this war is Biden and the Democrats' war, not the Republican or Trump's war," highlighting the difference from the previous administration's provision of free assistance to Ukraine.

Billions of dollars transaction for "100% tariffs on Russia"

According to online media Axios, the scale of the first batch of weapons sales is expected to reach $10 billion. Trump, who achieved such a massive weapons transaction, also criticized Russian President Putin, who has always been friendly towards him, on the same day.

He said, "after talking with Putin, I thought many times that we had already reached an (armistice) agreement," and added, "I came home and told my wife 'I had a very good conversation with Putin, and now everything is over,' but she said [Wow, strange, I heard that Russia just bombed a hospital nurse]."

Trump also warned, "if an (armistice) agreement is not reached within 50 days, extremely strict tariffs will be imposed on Russia, and a second round of tariffs will be imposed on countries trading with Russia." He added, "the tariff rate will be as high as 100%." This statement is interpreted as not only applying pressure on Russia, but also on its trade partner countries.

This is similar to the content of the sanctions bill against Russia currently being debated in the US Senate. The bill was jointly proposed by Trump's close ally, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham (South Carolina) and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut), and includes imposing 500% tariffs on products exported to the US from countries importing Russian oil and uranium.

"Money is money, negotiation is negotiation"?

Rutte said on the same day, "on Thursday (the 10th), President Trump called and said he had made the decision (to sell weapons). It is completely reasonable for Europeans to bear the costs (of war support)." He also pointed out, "this makes Europe take responsibility, strengthens Ukraine, and also lays the foundation for the expansion of production in the US defense industry."

What he referred to the 10th was the period when Trump sent tariff letters to countries such as South Korea and Japan, and conducted the final negotiations with the remaining major trading countries, including the EU, India, and Taiwan. Some analysts believe that NATO's active proposal to purchase US-made weapons due to security concerns caused by the war could also be part of the tariff negotiations.

However, Trump publicly disclosed the letter regarding a 30% tariff on the EU on the 12th. Although the timing of the disclosure was on the 12th, the date on the letter was marked as the 11th. This means that after deciding to sell weapons, the EU was notified of a punitive tariff 10 percentage points higher than the original 20% the next day. In addition, some analysts have pointed out that the relatively long 50-day buffer period given to Russia is a "subtle compromise" that appears to pressure Putin but actually leaves room for maneuver.

South Korea, which is in a standoff with North Korea, may also discuss security issues in the tariff negotiations. President Trump previously announced that the tariff agreement with South Korea would be part of a "comprehensive negotiation" including the defense expenditure for the US forces stationed in South Korea.

Source: JoongAng Ilbo

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1837702795961417/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author.