An Arab legend tells that a genie out of a lamp, like Aladdin's, promised a camel driver who was traveling through the desert to satisfy his wish. With only one condition: he would give his enemy twice as much as he would have given him. He chose to remain one-eyed. That is what Trump has done. The White House tenant, who has never believed in the World Trade Organization (hereinafter WTO) and is blocking the process of renewal of the judges that make up his Appellate Body, hastened to greet the WTO decision Like a great victory The American trade manager, Robert Lighthizer, was even more blunt: "For years Europe has been injecting massive subsidies into Airbus that have seriously damaged the US aerospace industry and its workers."

I begin by acknowledging that, on this occasion, only on this occasion, Trump is protected by legality, because it has been the WTO that has declared that subsidized interests granted to Airbus by Spain, France, Germany and the United Kingdom go against the rules established by the WTO. It has been this that authorizes the United States to impose additional fees on European helicopters and airplanes and a series of agricultural products; We are talking about tariffs that could amount to 7,500 million dollars, of which we would have about 800 million.

The ball is in the feet of the Americans. The European Union invited them to discuss the issue of fees. The trade commissioner Cecilia Malmström has explained very well: "Long before the summer we invited the Americans to discuss the situation of the rates. What we wanted is very simple: freeze or suspend our rates until we reach an agreement." Washington has not wanted. "More wood than war" (Groucho Marx, The Brothers in the West ).

What can we do now to force them to negotiate? Malmström stands for firmness: "If the United States decides to impose countermeasures authorized by the WTO, the European Union will have to do the same." Letters we have. At the beginning of the century, the WTO declared the tax subsidies granted to certain export companies, the Foreign Sales Corporation (FSC), to be contrary to law. The thing was so crude that the Americans were forced to repeal these aids. Nobody asked for compensation for the damages caused valued at 4,000 million dollars, but now we could resurrect the WTO decision and impose additional tariffs on US products that come to mind.

In the spring of next year, we will have more ammunition, because I am convinced that the WTO is going to declare the Social Security relief worth 10,000 million dollars graciously granted by the State of Washington to Boeing. With this technical tie in the aeronautical sector, the only ones who win are the lawyers of the two companies and China, which has already instructed its builder COMAC to accelerate the construction of the C919, a medium-route route plane that can dispute the terrain to the A320neo and the Boeing 737 MAX. The plane made its first test flight two years ago and - eye to patch - is fully financed with public funds. Once the Chinese reach technological maturity, they will flood the market with gifted airplanes.

How do we get out of this quagmire , which is not good for them or for us? It would be best to recognize that we have all sinned, forgive each other and sit down to establish new rules that fit into the legal framework of the WTO and do not harm any of us. The problem is that the White House, as I noted before, is not for the job. It intends that the pending cases be solved separately, a nonsense that will mean another torpedo in the world trade waterline already sufficiently damaged by the Sino-American conflict and Brexit.

In case anyone believes that we are talking about calderilla here, I will remember that Kristalina Giorgeva, the new director of the IMF, calculates that the impact of trade conflicts could lead to a global loss of 700 billion dollars next year, a 0.8 % of world GDP, much more than expected so far in the event that the worst forecasts were met.

The question now is very simple: how to take the Americans to the negotiating table? There is division of opinions, as in bulls. In the Trade Council that was held last October 1, two schools of thought faced each other: the Germans want to wait for the Boeing case to be resolved in the spring, probably because they believe that if they shake the hornet's nest, Trump would react with a new round of tariffs for cars, which for Spain would also be very bad. The French are in the opposite position: "We are prepared to respond firmly," said Bruno Le Maire, the French Minister of Economy, probably because he knows that the appeasement policy only serves to embolden thugs. Again, Churchill and Chamberlain.

And I go with Spain. Apart from affecting the 10% tax on airplanes, the US taxes 25% of our exports of olive oil (300 million dollars), olives (140 million dollars), cheese (100 million dollars), ham and porcine products, canned mussels, citrus fruits (200 million dollars) and vegetable juices. In this situation, I want to ask some questions: What has Spanish diplomacy done in Washington to avoid being punished so disproportionately? In the next Council on the 17th, is Spain going to favor German patience or French firmness? What are the legal hangers on which to hang the compensatory measures that Luis Planas has just requested in Brussels?

AS I am not fond of throwing the stone and hiding my hand, I answer the questions that I have formulated very clearly. The first thing that should be done is to invite the acting President of the Government, Pedro Sánchez, to move to Washington to explain the damages that the Spanish agricultural sectors will suffer, which are already in a very difficult situation. The second would be to bet on French firmness instead of on German prudence because I know from my own experience that the appeasement policy never gives results, much less with Trump. The third thing would be to request that the European Globalization Adjustment Fund be activated, designed to "support laid-off workers and self-employed workers who cease their work activity as a result of structural changes in world trade patterns due to the globalization". And if we are not here in a structural change derived from globalization, may God come and see it. As additional advice, I would recommend that the Government not continue to alter Trump by threatening to impose, without counting on our partners, a Google fee that Americans are very upset about.

As the one who warns is not a traitor, I want to underline that the tariff war we are witnessing is but one more manifestation of a much more general conflict, derived from commercial, monetary and fighting tensions over the technological predominance between China and USA. If we add Brexit to this lethal cocktail, the panorama is like praying.

José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil , former Foreign Minister, is MEP.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • Spain
  • Boeing
  • European Union
  • China
  • U.S
  • Airbus
  • United Kingdom
  • Luis Planas
  • Pedro Sanchez
  • GDP
  • Social Security
  • Germany
  • Europe
  • IMF
  • France
  • Google
  • José Manuel García-Margallo
  • World

THE MIDDLE EARTH without 'European champions'

Tribune History repeats itself

Grandstand Atmosphere changes