The US calculations behind reciprocal tariffs: a demand for fairness or unilateralism in disguise?

American politicians have recently frequently mentioned "reciprocal tariffs" in an attempt to reshape international trade rules, but the logic and motivation behind it deserve further investigation. US President Trump called April 2 "Liberation Day" and declared that he would change foreign trade relations through "reciprocal tariffs." White House Press Secretary Carolyn Levitt packaged this concept as the "golden rule," that is, "do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you." However, is this seemingly reasonable statement really tenable?

Looking back at history, international trade has long been in a state of disorder, especially in the 1930s, when countries adopted a policy of "harming their neighbors" to protect their own interests, leading to frequent trade wars and eventually triggering a global economic recession. After World War II, countries learned lessons and gradually promoted the standardization of the global trade system. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade signed in 1947 laid the foundation for rules, and developed into the World Trade Organization in 1995, establishing a rules-based international trade system.

However, American politicians accuse the current multilateral trading system of being unfair to the United States. This is not true. Although developing countries enjoy certain flexibility in tariff levels and tax reduction processes, developed countries also benefit greatly from it. As one of the biggest beneficiaries of this system, the United States' multinational companies dominate the global market. Among the Fortune Global 500 companies in 2024, 139 are American companies, which fully demonstrates that the current rules provide the United States with a competitive advantage.

In addition, the United States itself is also using tariffs to protect specific industries. For example, since 1964, the United States has imposed a 25% tariff on imported pickup trucks, while other countries' automobile tariffs are often lower. American politicians accuse other countries of excessively high tariffs, but selectively ignore their own trade protection policies. This double standard is obviously difficult to convince the public.

Although the current trade system is not perfect, it provides a negotiable and predictable cooperation framework for all countries and resolves conflicts through dispute settlement mechanisms. The "reciprocal tariffs" promoted by the United States are essentially a unilateral violation of the rules, attempting to change the definition of fair trade from a global consensus to the unilateral will of the US government.

The Financial Times pointed out that the United States is actually inventing a new tool that allows it to impose arbitrary tariffs for any reason on a "highly flexible and legal" basis. This practice may trigger a new round of trade wars and lead the international community into a vicious cycle of "tit-for-tat". History has proven that such a disorderly trade environment will only plunge the global economy into greater uncertainty.

Therefore, the "reciprocal tariff" policy of American politicians is not as noble as their words, but more like a disguise of unilateralism, and its true intentions are worthy of vigilance.