Dodatno k mojemu komentarju v petek (Vrhovno sodišče proti Trumpovim carinam: Je Trump kljub vsemu zmagal?), kjer sem povedal, da odločitev ameriškega vrhovnega sodišča ne ruši Trumpove zmage v carinski in trgovinski vojni (če v analizi uporabljamo trezne možgane namesto čustev in projekcij želja), je spodaj kratek izvleček iz današnjega komentarja – inteligentnega – Wolfganga Münchaua. Tudi on pravi, da je in da bo Trump v tej carinski vojni zmagal in da nasprotniki dajejo prevelik poudarek legalnosti njegovih dejanj.

Namesto tega pa bi se morali – to je moj dodatek – fokusirati na to, kako Trumpa efektivno zaustaviti v njegovi norosti, Kitajska mu je to jasno pokazala in je stisnil rep med noge. Za razliko od Kitajske pa je predsednica Evropske komisije Ursula von der Leyen že preemptively stisnila rep med noge in popustila ter pristala na vse Triumpove zahteve. In najhuje je, da bi to naredila ponovno, tudi če vrhovno sodišče Trumpu ne bi prepovedalo uporabe tega konkretnega mehanizma za izsiljevanje.

Zakaj? Ker EU ni suverena združba držav in ker ni pripravljena na žrtev, če bi Trump zaostril delovanje. “Snagatorji” ne spoštujejo podložnega uklanjanja njihovemu izsiljevanju. Nasprotno, to jih še podžge, da se še bolj izživljajo nad nemočnimi. Snagatorji razumejo samo silo (kot pravijo Srbi: budala razume samo šamar) in umaknejo se samo pred enakovrednim nasprotnikom. Trump, kot je javno povedal, med nasprotniki spoštuje samo Putina in Xija. Ker sta inteligentna, konkretna in odločna (po njegovih besedah) in ker ve, da imata sredstva, da udarita nazaj enako močno ali še bolj.

In enako se zdaj dogaja z Iranom. Trumpov odposlanec Witkoff je čez vikend izrazil presenečenje, da se Iran ni uklonil navkljub ameriškemu kopičenju vojaške sile okrog Irana. Jasno, (1) Iran več izgubi, če se ukloni Trumpovemu pritisku, kot bi izgubil v primeru vojne in (2) ima sredstva, da udari nazaj še močneje (Izrael in ameriške baze v regiji zravna z zemljo in potopi ameriški letalonosilki). Zato je Trump cviknil in čaka na odrešilni “diplomatski dogovor”, da reši svoj obraz.

Kdaj se bo EU končno postavila na lastne noge in začela delovati kot globalna sila?

(no, zgolj retorično vprašanje, saj vsi vemo, da se ne bo nikoli)

__________

Before we all start celebrating, it is worth reflecting for a moment on what the Supreme Court’s tariff ruling did — and what it didn’t. The only positive I can see is that it takes us outside the realm of threat. Donald Trump will no longer be able to point a tariff gun at the rest of us. The era of the tariff tweet, too, will end. Yet amid the bluster and the late-night posts, nothing of substance will change.

After all, virtually all the tariffs will survive unaltered. In the short-run, the President is covered. On Friday night, immediately after the Supreme Court ruling, he invoked Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, signing an executive order to impose an immediate 10% tariff on the rest of the world. On Saturday, he raised that figure to 15%, the maximum allowed under the Act. The tariffs will kick in tomorrow — but despite what some journalists have claimed, none of this is “defying” the judges. On the contrary, Trump is merely implementing their ruling.

…

Here, then, is the timeline: the temporary 15% tariffs will kick in this week, buying Trump the space to impose the bureaucratic procedures that make them permanent. He could even end up raising the total level of tariffs if he so wished; I myself foresee a scenario where tariffs on cars from the EU and the UK go up by a tenth. That is even as he uses the law to bolster his broader argument about America’s economic position. “They rip us off,” he said of the EU a year ago. Well, that is precisely what Section 301 is about.

So if you hate Trump, you may well celebrate the Supreme Court ruling as a symbolic defeat. If, however, you hate the tariffs, you have no reason to cheer: the powers of the President to impose tariffs unilaterally are not affected at all.

Why, then, are people celebrating? I’m reminded here of the lawfare against Trump ahead of the 2024 election. I remember the BBC in particular expressing gleefully confidence that the New York criminal case against Trump would deprive him of the means of launching an effective campaign. In that particular case, the US Supreme Court came to Trump’s rescue. What has always helped Trump is a tendency by his opponents to overestimate the effect of legal games.

A deluded German commentator described the ruling as an “embarrassment of historic proportions”. There is an awful lot of “peak Trump” commentary about. Statements such as these may be designed to make us Europeans feel better, but they just don’t hold up to scrutiny. The tariffs were Trump’s most important economic policy decision — and they will stay, even as he has almost three more years of his four-year term.

The real problem with Trump is not that he is a buffoon, but that he learned how to game the political system. Not all of the mud he throws will stick. But a lot will. The President may no longer hold his tariff gun, but an economic bazooka remains, and it is pointing at the rest of us.

Vir: Wolfgang Münchau, UnHerd