In case you missed it on Tuesday, Donald Trump signed an executive order. This order is an assault on state laws intended to curb fossil fuel use and address the climate crisis. Yet, the Trump administration is already advancing an even more dangerous and much broader strategy to reassert federal supremacy over energy policy. They are right to think that this action is necessary in order to maintain American energy dominance and protect national security.
In addition to the executive order, the Trump administration has frozen over $1 billion in funding destined for Cornell University. This freeze is part of a worrying trend of political escalation between the federal government and schools that oppose or resist implementing climate-related policies. Michael Kotlikoff, representing Cornell, made a key point. He urged that universities should not let increasing political, legal, and financial incitements stifle discussions in public and the free flow of ideas.
At the same time, global trade turnaround picture continues to be blurry largely due to Trump’s comprehensive tariffs on imports. The Bank of England has gone as far as to warn that the risks these tariffs pose to global growth are substantial. The Bank’s financial policy committee reported that the global risk environment has deteriorated significantly since its last update in November. It claimed that US tariff announcements had resulted in the “significant escalation in risks to global growth” and inflation.
Against this backdrop, and likely in response to the developments above, China declared a historic pivot. Initially declared as just 34%, starting Thursday it will raise the stakes by imposing 84% tariffs on US goods. To do so would completely undermine the decision, which has led to increased prices for staples like household goods, clothing, electronics and groceries. The Budget Lab at Yale University calculated these tariffs would amount to a cost of $3,800 for the average US household.
Former US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent highlighted alarm over China’s excessive and illegal tariff introduction. He condemned China’s retaliatory actions as “sad” and framed them as a “losing proposition for Beijing.” Bessent went on to say that no one wins in a trade war. And then he laid out what he’s worried about in terms of Chinese unwillingness to engage in negotiations. He thinks that’s doubly unfortunate because they’re among the worst offenders as far as international trading system norms.
This challenge is compounded by the way the rest of the world has reacted to US tariffs. According to some reports, 69 other countries have already contacted the White House in hopes of negotiating reduced or delayed tariffs. Vladimir Abramov / Shutterstock.com At the same time, European Union countries are set to approve retaliatory measures against Trump’s tariffs as soon as Wednesday.
Bessent emphasized the need for equilibrium in the U.S. trade relationships around the world. This is a constructive first step toward mitigating the harmful effects of these punitive tariffs. He noted that should China opt to devalue its currency, it would act as a tax on the rest of the world, compelling other nations to raise their tariffs in retaliation. If China begins to devalue, then that’s a tax on the rest of the world,” he noted with concern.
As these events play out, they further expose the deepening chasm between our domestic energy policies and our international trade relations. Trump’s executive order stands as a testament to his administration’s commitment to prioritize American energy interests, even in the face of widespread criticism from environmental advocates and higher education institutions.