Last week, the Trump administration criticized the European Union for its trade deal with India — labeled by Brussels as the “mother of all deals.”
A few days later, on February 2, President Donald Trump himself announced that the US would conclude a trade agreement with India, calling Prime Minister Modi “one of his best friends”, and that after a phone call, punitive tariffs imposed by the US last year would be reduced.
A few days ago, the US president warned Canada that it would pay dearly, also through exorbitant tariffs, after thawing trade relations with China, following a visit by Prime Minister Mark Carney to Xi Jinping and Ottawa and Beijing agreeing to a new type of strategic partnership.
To underscore his point, Trump has developed the narrative that China will take control of Canada and to the point of even canceling hockey for Canadians.
If (recent) history plays is a guide (this time too), it would not be surprising if, starting with the Canada-China case, Trump applies uses the same tune as he did in the EU-India case: making an announcement that he has discussed with Xi, as he had done with Modi, for an American-Chinese agreement.
An agreement that is not necessarily solid, but at least meant to create the public the feeling, in the short term, that the US remains in the game with China as well as India after allies ostracized by the US – the EU and Canada – turned to the Indians and the Chinese to counter Washington’s aggressiveness.
In recent days, the same Donald Trump has relaunched armed threats against Iran, and deployed warships to the Middle East region.
Two things to keep in mind here:
- Trump missed the opportunity to do something relevant in the heat of the protests in Iran – although he had instigated the people in the streets to stay there and even take over the institutions, telling protesters that “help is on the way”. In the meantime, the repression has been drowned in blood and the death toll could be in the tens of thousands. Once it has resorted to such savagery and resisted, the criminal regime in Tehran is certainly already calculating to resist even more. Equally certain is the fact that the regime believes that it can hold out for longer.
- And now, with the streets of Iran emptied of protesters and the US naval group already in the area, the regime in Tehran is open to negotiating, and Trump is happy to have someone to negotiate with – dryly and without any moral pressure exerted in real time. Both sides are aware that talks are essential, an armed confrontation will be harmful to both Tehran and Washington. What would have to be negotiated, as it results from the statements so far by both sides – Iran and the US – would be an agreement on the nuclear file. If anything, anything, were to come together on this issue, both the regime in Tehran and the Trump administration would be able to proclaim that they got something: the military-theocratic regime, with continuity (perhaps a little cosmeticized), and Trump, allegedly saving the region. Something is missing from this whole story: the Iranian people are missing, more precisely that significant segment that had taken to the streets and wants fundamental change. It is missing, because the Khamenei regime has a huge capacity to adapt to stay in power, it is also missing because Trump, in reality and despite his words, had never had a realistic solution and even less a miraculous solution for the Iranians who dreamed of and deserved something better. For Iran, as the signals coming from Washington and Tehran suggest at this moment, a copy (albeit a pale one) of the Venezuela model is more likely. Not in the sense of capturing any leader and oil, but in the sense of a “cohabitation” of Trumpist Washington with the Iranian regime. It’s not a “fantastic” scenario for Trump, but the US president will certainly sell him as such. And it’s a super nightmare scenario for the Iranians who went out on the streets, full of hope only to see themselves slaughtered and then betrayed.
Of course, there is also the case of Greenland, which from a shameless affirmation of Donald Trump’s personal will has become a case study for his huge potential to backpedal when confronted.
From all this three-point deployment – the EU, Canada, Iran – what can be seen is an America on the offensive, but basically on the defensive. An America in full verbal affirmation of the initiative, but at the same time, factually, silently adapting to the consequences of actions triggered by its president.
Through his trade war, Trump pushed the EU and India towards each other, and in the end he was forced to ask for a truce with India. Likewise, he pushed Canada towards China, and what will probably follow is also a form of truce with Xi, although a slightly different one from the Indian one, as it will be shaped by the specific differences related to China.
And as for Iran, after rhetorically treating it like Venezuela, it will basically be pushed to treat it as it is: like Iran, and something entirely different from Venezuela.
It is not the best time for the American president – I have said it HERE before – but it is equally true that no one has done more than him to find himself in this situation.
