[Source / Observer Network Xiong Chaoyi] U.S. President Trump has recklessly imposed tariffs, disrupting global trade and even prompting several small American businesses to file a lawsuit against him.

According to the South China Morning Post on May 28th, in response to this lawsuit, U.S. Commerce Secretary Lutnik, Treasury Secretary Besant, Trade Representative Grier, as well as Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Rubio submitted a statement to the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York on May 23rd local time. It is reported that a three-judge panel of the court is reviewing whether Trump's implementation of tariffs under the pretext of a "national emergency" is legal.

These key cabinet members of Trump strongly urged the court to "uphold the president's broad tariff powers," and hyped up that if Trump's administration suffers a legal setback in this case, it may overturn the "asymmetric" trade truce between the U.S. and China, embarrass the U.S. government, and even reignite the conflict between India and Pakistan.

These officials claimed that Trump recently used his tariff power to facilitate the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, bringing about a "fragile peace." They warned that with the end of the 90-day "tariff deferral period" approaching in July, U.S. trade negotiations with dozens of countries are still in a "delicate state," and if the court rejects these tariffs, countries may boldly exploit this new vulnerability to retaliate against the U.S.

Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University and a joint lawyer for a group of small businesses filing similar tariff cases with the U.S. Court of International Trade, clearly stated that Trump's tariff policy is unreasonable.

On May 27th local time, Somin said at an event hosted by the Cato Institute: "In the last century or even longer, there has never been a precedent for such a vast and extensive power being claimed through the declaration of a state of emergency." He pointed out that the Trump administration certainly cannot ignore another requirement of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which states that the threat must be extraordinary, not just a "state of emergency." Therefore, tariffs are now being used as an excuse for Trump to act for other purposes.

On April 2nd local time, at the White House, Trump held a speech while holding a report on foreign trade barriers. Visual China.

It was reported that Trump's use of tariffs as a policy tool has drawn strong criticism from his opponents, as he has unclear goals and inconsistent information in his so-called efforts to "rebuild American manufacturing."

However, Lutnik insisted that if the court limits Trump's tariff powers, "foreign adversaries will reduce their motivation to reach substantial agreements" and "will destroy the carefully crafted, advantageous 'asymmetric' U.S.-China trade agreement to address our ongoing trade deficit."

He claimed that the U.S. raised tariffs to exert additional pressure on its foreign policy objectives, forcing China to sit down at the negotiating table. Due to Trump invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to declare a "national emergency" and implement "reciprocal tariffs," China has reduced tariffs on U.S. goods. "The Trump administration is working to resolve long-standing disputes with China."

The South China Morning Post pointed out that since Trump returned to power, he has once again ignited the Sino-U.S. tariff war, only to be quickly countered by China. Trump's series of tariff threats have disrupted global supply chains and sparked concerns about inflation and a slowdown in the global economy. Until May 10th and 11th, high-level economic and trade talks between China and the U.S. were held in Geneva, Switzerland, where both sides agreed to reduce tariffs within 90 days and cut rates by 115%. However, China still imposes export controls on certain critical minerals.

Lutnik hyped up to the court, claiming that if the judge decides to issue an injunction against the tariffs, it will "disrupt ongoing negotiations, allow China to act aggressively during strategic competition, expose American citizens to predatory economic behavior by foreign actors, and threaten national security."

In addition to using trade negotiations with China as a talking point, Lutnik also claimed that tariffs enabled Trump to facilitate the ceasefire agreement between two nuclear-armed countries—India and Pakistan—earlier this month.

"Allies and adversaries alike are watching the U.S. courts for signs of limiting presidential power," Lutnik claimed. According to his account, the ceasefire between India and Pakistan was the direct result of Trump's intervention. Following Trump's proposal to expand trade access between the two countries in exchange for suspending hostilities, the three-day armed conflict between these two South Asian neighbors ended on May 10th, resulting in a "fragile ceasefire."

"In this situation, an adverse ruling limiting presidential power could lead India and Pakistan to question the effectiveness of President Trump's proposals, threatening regional security and the lives of millions," Lutnik stated.

Besant, who is responsible for recent trade negotiations with China, did not mention Trump's so-called "tariffs-for-peace" argument. However, he introduced the latest progress in the U.S. negotiations with dozens of countries. He said: "These negotiations are currently in a delicate state, ongoing discussions, and no formal final agreement has been reached yet."

So far, the U.S. has only announced an agreement with the UK, but details remain undecided; negotiations with India, Japan, and South Korea are reportedly in the later stages; while negotiations with Mexico, Canada, and China are reportedly in the early stages. Besant said that in each case, the negotiations are based on Trump's tariffs. If the court rejects these tariffs, countries may boldly exploit this new vulnerability to retaliate against the U.S.

In this regard, Grier also chimed in with a supporting argument in the statement, claiming that if the court bans Trump from imposing tariffs, it will send a signal to America's trading partners that this U.S. president "lacks the power to respond swiftly to future emergencies," and these countries may exacerbate the competitive environment for U.S. exporters.

On May 12th, U.S. Treasury Secretary Besant and Trade Representative Grier held a media briefing. Video screenshot.

Rubio, now the chief diplomat of the Trump administration, warned the court that the judiciary "does not have the appropriate authority to handle and intervene in foreign policy and national security matters." He warned that if the court makes conflicting rulings, it will cause the U.S. to lose face globally. He described such results as "dangerous and emboldening allies and adversaries," and would permanently worsen the decline of American industry and unsustainable trade deficits.

Notably, Trump's attempt to boast that he facilitated the India-Pakistan ceasefire has drawn strong dissatisfaction from India. According to reports by Bloomberg and The New York Times on May 13th local time, the Indian Foreign Ministry directly refuted this claim on the same day.

Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson for the Indian Foreign Ministry, clarified that all U.S. statements are unfounded. He said: "Leaders of India and the United States have discussed changing military situations, but trade issues were not mentioned in these discussions." An unnamed Indian official also told Bloomberg that during the series of talks before the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, India never discussed trade issues with U.S. officials.

On May 12th, the spokesperson for China's Ministry of Commerce issued a statement regarding the joint statement of the China-U.S. Geneva economic and trade talks. The statement noted that the talks reaching a joint statement was an important step towards resolving differences through equal dialogue and consultation, laying the foundation and creating conditions for further bridging differences and deepening cooperation.

The joint statement reached multiple positive consensuses. Both sides recognized the importance of bilateral economic and trade relations to both countries and the global economy, and the importance of sustainable, long-term, mutually beneficial bilateral economic and trade relations. Based on a spirit of mutual openness, continuous communication, cooperation, and mutual respect, they will continue to advance relevant work.

This article is an exclusive piece by Observer Network, unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7509336199509688858/

Disclaimer: This article solely represents the author's views, and you can express your attitude by clicking the "like/dislike" buttons below.