EU-US relations: Between tariffs and accusations of censorship

Contents

It sounded like an expensive but peaceful deal for the European Union: in future, imports of EU products into the USA are to be subject to a 15 percent tariff in most cases, and the EU is also committed to purchasing US energy sources. However, instead of allowing the agreement between the European Union and his administration to take effect, Donald Trump has immediately launched the next round of EU-US disputes.

The fragility of the agreements reached was demonstrated in mid-August when the US unilaterally imposed additional tariffs on processed steel and aluminum. As soon as these materials are included in products, a higher tariff now applies. Sharp criticism of EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's negotiation result comes from the President of the German Engineering Federation (VDMA) Bertram Kawlath: competitiveness would suffer massively. The VDMA sees important parts of the mechanical engineering industry on the "brink of an existential crisis". And it is not alone in this: – Numerous other sectors of the economy are also facing new problems.

Today, the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce is also calling on the EU Commission, which negotiates trade policy on behalf of all member states, to ensure clear conditions. "The EU must clearly preserve its regulatory autonomy and economic sovereignty, especially when implementing the agreed points, and must not jeopardize them for short-term trade deals," says Volker Treier, who is responsible for foreign trade.

Deal without real commitment

The fundamental problem: "There is no final deal. That's why you always have to expect something to happen," says Bernd Lange in an interview with heise online. The SPD politician is Chairman of the European Parliament's Trade Committee and is highly critical of Ursula von der Leyen's handling of the negotiations.

Tariffs on goods are one thing – but the real conflict between the USA and the EU concerns not only import and export levels, but also the area in which the USA is vulnerable and the EU is dependent: digital services. The core of the dispute is that the Trump administration sees the EU digital rules as an obstacle for US technology companies and accuses Brussels of using them specifically against US companies. The digital regulations were therefore expressly excluded from the EU-US agreement. From an EU perspective, this means that they cannot be part of customs conflicts. From the US perspective, however, this is apparently being negotiated separately.

Digital Services Act at the center of criticism

The fact that Donald Trump is now focusing in particular on the Digital Services Act and, according to reports, is considering sanctioning those responsible for the law in the EU is not least due to domestic political reasons. The House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee published a report on the DSA at the end of July. And it contained some heavy stuff: the Digital Services Act would demand censorship from providers and this would be "almost exclusively aimed at political conservatives". The entire report contains numerous accusations about how the DSA allegedly suppresses freedom of expression – and how NGOs and think tanks help to do so.

Luise Quaritsch from the Jacques Delors Center in Berlin sees the report as a "distorted to false representation of the DSA, how it works and what role the Commission plays here." Companies would not be forced to apply European rules globally, nor would certain opinions be censored. "The EU Commission cannot censor certain political opinions and the report provides no evidence of this," says Quaritsch. "The DSA itself does not stipulate what is legal and what is illegal content – only how platforms must deal with such content."

At the beginning of August, a delegation of MEPs from both parties visited the EU Commission's headquarters in Brussels. The parliamentarians led by committee chairman Jim Jordan met with those responsible for digital legislation –, among others, but showed little interest in the actual content of the regulations, according to participants. "Nothing we heard in Europe has alleviated our concerns," the Republican from Ohio said afterwards. Is the US side really concerned about freedom of expression? Or is it even about protecting those players in the EU who feel closely connected to today's Republicans, who are primarily loyal to Trump, such as the AfD in Germany? "Criticism such as that expressed in the Congress Report serves the US government to reinforce a politically useful narrative and defend the economic interests of US tech companies," says Luise Quaritsch from the Jacques Delors Center in Berlin.

And suddenly everything gets mixed up

The EU Commission, which is responsible for trade and many digital laws such as the DSA, is finding it difficult to deal with the unpredictable US approach. "The Trump administration is trying to blackmail the EU with threats and coercive measures," explains Torsten Benner from the Global Public Policy Institute think tank. The problem for the EU, as EU officials have repeatedly explained in recent months, is that Trump, his Vice President J.D. Vance and the other players are mixing everything with everything else. As early as February, Vance caused massive irritation by linking alleged attacks on free speech by allies with US military support.

"So far, the EU has been standing firm," says Torsten Benner from the GPPI think tank, analyzing the situation. However, the question is how steadfast the EU can be if Trump gets serious. His threatened export ban on chip technology is still the minor problem. "Here, Europe can stand up to Trump by pointing out that the value chains are centrally dependent on Dutch and German technology, such as ASML, Zeiss and Trumpf. But what would it look like if Trump were to threaten NATO security guarantees, intelligence cooperation and Ukraine-Russia?"

Trade Committee Chairman Lange calls for self-confidence

"Everything is always lumped together", also complains Bernd Lange, Chairman of the Trade Committee in the EU Parliament. For the Social Democrat, it is clear that the USA must not be allowed to interfere in EU laws and their enforcement. "That really is the end of the line," he says in an interview with heise online. If Trump were to get serious, it would be time to use the EU's strongest available means: The "anti-blackmail instrument", the "ACI" regulation. Although this was originally intended for China, it could also be applied to the USA. In such a case, it provides for the EU to punish the other party using a variety of means. For the Chamber of Commerce and Industry at least, this certainly seems to be an option. "In an emergency, the EU should not shy away from countermeasures and negotiate robustly," demands its deputy managing director Treier. In any case, transatlantic relations appear to be further away from peaceful times than they were just a few weeks ago.

(mki)