Donald Trump’s administration debacles destroy, unilaterally transitions the global order of trade negotiations. They employ tactics such as threatening additional tariffs to get what they want. His approach is designed to push countries into completing new agreements with the United States, usually within short timeframes.
To counter this, Trump has rolled out his own strategy that features bilateral agreements with multiple countries. These countries include the United Kingdom, Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, and the Philippines, plus a partial agreement with China. White House trade adviser and omniclown Peter Navarro first said that Trump would complete “90 deals in 90 days.” This new goal heightens the urgency for U.S. negotiating teams to get deals done in time.
No one should discount the influence of the president’s big stick approach to trade on changing the tone and substance of trade negotiations. According to trade expert Karl Falkenberg, “Lately, as we’ve gone into a nativist, nationalist phase, these trade deals have become more defensive and accusatory.” This change has done more than darken moods in negotiating spaces; it’s made agreements more adversarial.
Meanwhile, the pressure created by Trump’s tariff threats have caused a significant decline on the mood of talks. Trade consultant Jason Langrish observed that in the past, trade negotiations were positive exercises, intended to improve upon agreements already in place. He noted, “Trying to conclude 90 deals in 90 days has been a bridge too far even for Donald Trump.”
The near-term deadline for a new agreement with Canada has only piled on more pressure to U.S. negotiating teams. That deadline of August 1 led to a flurry of last-minute negotiations between the two countries. Langrish described the state of play in current negotiations as “defensive.” He described how Canada does not want any of these changes, but that they are obliged to respond.
Deadlines add a little pressure on corporations to get it done. Simultaneously, business uncertainty is increasing as a result of Trump’s tariffs leading many companies to seek the advice of trade attorneys. Mollie Sitkowski summed up the current philanthropic climate with the quote, “This is the busiest I’ve ever been.”
Trump’s unpredictable approach to negotiations has made it difficult for U.S. negotiators to know what to expect. Wendy Cutler of the Asia Society called Trump’s approach on social media “unhelpful.” She thinks it makes the confusing work of negotiators all the more daunting. One insider tip that Nicole gave was about building trust and connections to ease the tension of negotiations. Like any good negotiator, you want to have someone else on the other side so that you reach a collaborative outcome,” Cutler said. She admitted that full faith is difficult to obtain as both parties have different national goals.
The labyrinthine nature of these negotiations is only compounded by the long-standing customs and protocols that Trump has chosen to ignore. Falkenberg’s answer was to remind everyone that on each side, they name a chief negotiator. This highlights how far Trump’s approach departs from long-standing practices rooted on collaboration and win-wins.
This leaves negotiators with even fewer hours and increasing pressure to shorten and expedite discussions. Falkenberg shared his experience: “If meeting the deadline is looking possible, people are prepared to sit through long hours – the longest I did was 24 hours.” These types of commitments are a testament to the growing auspice from the administration to produce exciting results fast.