Photo by Will Goodman on Unsplash
It was rather ‘head spinning’ week but a certain logic emerged from Trump’s actions in Geneva and Evian-les-Bains, the site of the French G7, not to mention the continuing stream of thoughts from President Trump with respect to USMCA and the approaching July 1st announcement.
Let me go there, to USMCA, first before I follow up on the leaders statements and views at the G7 French Summit.
We saw, recently, Trump’s distaste for the USMCA renewal. And the distaste continued and even strengthened. By this past Wednesday his aversion to renewal became even louder than earlier. As described by Tonda MacCharles in the Toronto Star, Trump made his apparent dislike even more clear:
“U.S. President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he would prefer it if the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement on trade “expired immediately,” although he left open the possibility that he could sign a new deal, but would still rather leave it “unsigned.””
““I’d rather have it terminated,” Trump told reporters on the tarmac at Paris Orly Airport, where he arrived after leaving the G7 summit before a dinner hosted by President Emmanuel Macron.”
It would seem if all three leaders fail to adopt renewal, then it would seem that the three partners would undertake an annual review in followup years, though Trump has expressed some scepticism over this:
“If the three signatories don’t declare an intention to renew the deal for another 16 years, a period of annual reviews would kick in, during which the pact would remain in force for another decade — unless any party gives the required six months’ notice to withdraw.”
“Trump said that’s clearly his preferred option at this time.”
“To me, I think it’s better without it,” he said. “I mean, to be honest with you, I’m not a big fan of it.””
“Asked by reporters to clarify what he meant by terminating the agreement, and if he meant allowing it to roll over into an annual process, Trump said, “I would rather not have the agreement, but I may sign it. But we do better as a country if we don’t have an agreement.”
““Yeah, I’m thinking about maybe we won’t be able to make a deal. I would rather not have the USMCA.””
So what is Trump’s view of the trilateral agreement and its pending renewal? There is certainly a strong view, at least from the Canadian side that Trump’s expressed open dislike for the agreement is a part of his negotiating approach: pushing the negative and receiving more from the other side determined to reach some accommodation with the US and Trump. MacCharles references former and current Canadian negotiators expressing such a view:
“Former Alberta premier Jason Kenney shrugged off the comments, saying in an interview that Canadians “know how not to get too agitated” by Trump’s “improvised comments” to reporters.”
““I think there’s two parallel things happening. I think that Dominic LeBlanc [Minister of Internal Trade] and (chief trade negotiator) Janice Charette are having productive conversations with Jamieson Greer and his team on a conventional way to address U.S. concerns and Canadian concerns, and they’re trying to do that contained way,” Kenney said.”
““And then the other track is the Trump theatre track, where he just floods the zone and destabilizes his counter party with all that stuff.””
My sense is that Trump actually holds both views of the negotiations: which position wins out with him, well that depends on circumstances and what those around him from the other negotiating side especially are saying. It is a ‘crapshoot’ not a strategy.
And now let’s take a look at the French G7 and its conclusion. There was a fair degree of trepidation expressed over Trump’s likely statements and actions at the French G7. Trump has left early from several recent G7 gatherings.
There is no question that there was a fair degree of ‘fawning’ by various leaders including the host President Macron, who threw in a dinner at Versailles following the G7 conclusion to keep Trump in the loop. As described by WPR’s Judah Grunstein in a piece titled, “The G7 Summit Is a Damning Failure of Global Leadership”:
“The summit communiqué hailed Trump’s “strong leadership” in achieving what it characterized as the “breakthrough” interim deal ending the war against Iran. The G7 European leaders also seemed heartened by the communiqué’s inclusion of a statement of support for Kyiv. And Trump himself signaled a renewed commitment to seeking to resolve the war in Ukraine now that Iran was “in the rearview mirror,” only to make it clear in the same breath that he does not consider the conflict to be America’s problem.”
“The pageantry of self-humiliation also reveals a failure at the highest levels of global leadership to face up to the reality that everyone can see so clearly: Trump is erratic and unreliable, as is America under his leadership. But because he can no longer be considered an open parenthesis in American politics that will close when he is gone, that broader unreliability extends beyond his time in office.”
The conclusion of the G7 was described in NYTimes by Mark Landler this way:
“Gathering in a sun-drenched spa town on the sparkling waters of Lake Geneva, the leaders of the Group of 7 put aside months of rancor to praise President Trump for his preliminary deal with Iran. They declared it a “breakthrough” that would unclog the Strait of Hormuz and could put the Middle East on a path to peace. And they got the United States to sign a remarkably unified joint statement on Ukraine, pledging “unwavering support” for Kyiv in its war against Moscow.”
“Then, on Wednesday, hours before the leaders were scheduled to disperse, Mr. Trump threw a few rocks in the water. The president warned that if he was dissatisfied with the final Iran deal, he could rip it up and restart the bombardment of the country. If the Iranians did not behave properly, he said, “we’ll go right back to dropping bombs right smack in the middle of their head.””
“Mr. Trump’s inflammatory statements left the rest of the leaders scrambling to catch up. His outburst over Iran sowed fresh doubts about the deal’s durability, even as Mr. Trump continued to insist it was very strong. And it punctured any illusions — such as those that still exist about Mr. Trump — that European leaders could corral the president with a mixture of pomp, charm and gifts.”
So, where did the G7 leaders land? Well, looking at the G7 declaration, it is clear that G7 leaders were able to turn all minds to what most of the G7 leadership sees as critical – Ukraine:
““We, the Leaders of the G7, stand united in our unwavering support for Ukraine in defending its freedom, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. We reaffirm our solidarity with the Ukrainian population suffering from attacks on their critical infrastructure and cultural heritage. We commend Ukraine for its resilience and progress on the battlefield in recent months and emphasise there is now a new momentum.”
“To support and accelerate this new momentum, we agree to increase the delivery of air defence capacities, additional systems and interceptors, and long-range capabilities. We are also ready to consider extending to Ukraine the benefit of licenses to allow for an increase in Ukraine’s military production.”
“We commit to increase the pressure on the Russian war economy. In this context, we will strengthen our sanctions on the oil and gas sectors. We consider this the right moment to proceed with additional measures, as President Trump has delivered a deal that we support in reopening the Strait of Hormuz.”
The apparent turn to Ukraine and Russia’s continuing deadly efforts is critical. The war has gone on far too long – longer than World War I and Trump’s almost disgraceful discussions with Putin need to be put in the rearview mirror. The Iran deal – as bad as it is, and it is, if it limits conflict now, opens the Strait, and pressures Iran to hold in abeyance its nuclear efforts for the time being, well that will have to do – at least while Trump drives US efforts.
