We salute the return of US President Donald Trump to the White House and his desire to impose… Customs duties Excessive demand on European goods causes problems in transatlantic trade relations and opens a new chapter in a turbulent history that has lasted more than 60 years.
In this report published by the French newspaper Le Point, writer Emmanuel Beretta returns to the economic battles that shaped relations between Brussels and Washington.
1- The Chicken War of 1963
The poultry story ignited the world as the United States took advantage of World War II to modernize its poultry industry. After the war, it flooded the European market with cheap chicken, and quickly captured 50% of the market.
Faced with what was seen as unfair competition, the nascent European Economic Community, pushed by France and Germany, imposed tariffs in 1962 through the Common Agricultural Policy.
The American response was quick. In 1963, President Johnson imposed 25% tariffs on many European products, including Volkswagen trucks, a measure that is still in effect today.
The issue took on a significant diplomatic dimension, to the point that Senator J. William Fulbright – a distant predecessor of Donald Trump – threatened to withdraw American forces from NATO.
Chancellor Adenauer later confided that this dispute occupied almost half of his discussions with Kennedy, on a par with the Berlin and Bay of Pigs crises. This clearly shows that the NATO threat has been a tool of blackmail for a long time.
2- Banana campaign
The “Banana War,” which poisoned transatlantic relations for nearly two decades, is a good example of the fundamental differences between the European and American trade models.
It all started in 1993, when Brussels created its Common Banana Market Organization (CMOB), a complex system of quotas and tariffs that favored former European colonies (the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific) at the expense of American multinationals. Like Chiquita. Washington, an advocate of unrestricted free trade, sees this as distinct discrimination.
The case took an epic turn at the World Trade Organization, where the United States, with the support of Latin American countries, won the case in 1997. But Europe resisted, which led to the United States retaliating in the amount of approximately $191 million in 1999.
A final agreement was not reached in Geneva until December 2009, when the European Union agreed to reduce customs duties from 176 euros to 114 euros per ton. It is a soft surrender that represents a victory for free trade over the post-colonial European model, while revealing Washington’s firepower in trade disputes.
3- Hormone-treated beef saga
The hormone-treated beef saga is another powerful example of the clash of regulatory cultures between Brussels and Washington. It all started in 1989, when the European Economic Community decided to ban the use of 6 growth hormones in beef production. This decision effectively closed the European market to American, Canadian and Australian livestock farmers, leading to an epic battle before the World Trade Organization.
The confrontation took a stunning turn in 1999, when Washington, based on its victory before the dispute settlement body of the World Trade Organization, imposed targeted sanctions on symbolic European products, most notably French Roquefort (one of the most famous types of French cheese).
A compromise did not emerge until 2011, when Brussels agreed to allow the import of “clean” American meat free of hormones in exchange for lifting sanctions. This was proof that Europe has the ability to stand up to Uncle Sam when it comes to its health standards.
4- Boeing-Airbus… air attack
This was the longest trade dispute in the history of the World Trade Organization. For 17 years, Europeans and Americans have accused each other of illegally supporting their aviation heroes.
A war of attrition took place in its final phase between 2016 and 2021, which illustrates the stubborn logic of escalating trade sanctions.
The World Trade Organization, the arbiter of this massive competition, first ruled in favor of the United States in 2016, approving potential sanctions worth $10 billion against European subsidies for Airbus.
Washington seized the opportunity in 2019, hitting the old continent with $7.5 billion in targeted tariffs, affecting Airbus and some other consumer products.
Europe responded in kind at the end of 2020, when the World Trade Organization gave the green light to impose $4 billion in sanctions on Boeing and American agricultural products.
Finally, the air conflict ended in June 2021, when Joe Biden and Ursula von der Leyen signed a 5-year truce. This truce was not a victory as much as it was a sign of mutual exhaustion, at a time when the emergence of Chinese aviation is reshuffling the cards in global competition.
5- The dispute over genetically modified materials
GMOs highlight differences in perceptions between the two sides of the Atlantic when it comes to agriculture. On the one hand, Europe is clinging to its traditional agricultural model. On the other hand, the United States of America is at the forefront of biotechnology-based agriculture. It is an ongoing struggle that illustrates the contradictory visions of modern agriculture.
6- The First Trump War
Donald Trump’s arrival to the White House in 2016 was a turning point. Two years later, the weapon of tariffs on European steel (25%) and aluminum (10%) was launched in the name of “national security.”
Europe responded by imposing taxes on bourbon, Harley Davidson, and countless other products, especially in the states where candidate Trump won the largest number of presidential votes… an escalation that only ended with the election of Joe Biden, who contented himself with suspending tariffs without canceling them.
Moreover, Donald Trump and agreedJean-Claude Juncker In July 2018, a joint working group was formed to cancel all customs duties on industrial products.
In return, the Europeans agreed to import more liquefied gas and soybeans.
7- The inflation control law is another controversial point
The $369 billion climate plan under the Inflation Reduction Act is worrying Europeans. Behind his green ambitions, the inflation reduction law hides a purely American protectionism.
Huge subsidies to American green industries attract investors who have until now been enabling Europeans to lead the race in green technologies.
Europe has responded with a “net zero industry law” (related to promoting green energy) and the possibility of public authorities responding to US subsidies in order to keep investors in Europe.
The author says at the end of the article that these seven major conflicts reveal one constant, which is the difficulty of reconciling the different economic and societal models on both sides of the Atlantic.
It is recognized that the Europeans and Americans are the best allies, but they are different, but these differences – according to the writer – did not weaken transatlantic trade in the long term.
Despite these tensions, the European Union and the United States remain distinguished trading partners, together accounting for more than 30% of global trade, so we must wait for Donald Trump and his second trade war with the calm of the old forces.
