The U.S. economy is the largest in the world. Our trading partners want access to our markets because of the amount of money we spend on goods and services. This gives us a distinct advantage during trade negotiations. In recent trade talks with Mexico and Canada, we negotiated the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which is expected to be marginally better for us than NAFTA.

Trade negotiations are always tough and tariff threats are sometimes used, but it’s usually done with respect and behind closed doors. We now have a new approach: We publicly insult and threaten our trading partners. Bullying smaller countries during trade talks, embarrassing their leaders and threatening them in such a public way is unnecessary and harmful to getting these deals done.

Some economists had predicted that if the U.S. followed through with tariff threats on Canada, it might throw parts of their economy into a recession. After 9/11, President George W. Bush called Canada to ask for their help as we prepared to go to war in Afghanistan. Canada didn’t blink. Their troops stood shoulder to shoulder with ours in that war.

The size of the U.S. market already gives us the upper hand in these talks. A good deal maker would see that and carefully protect long-term trade relationships while winning concessions. With China soon to move ahead of us as the largest economy in the world, other countries will be very happy to enter multilateral trade deals with them.

The U.S. needs to correct some trade inequities with China and stop their intellectual property abuses, but our negotiating style carries the risk for a long-lasting trade war or, worse, a cold war. American business, jobs and our national security are at increased risk if we overplay our hand in these trade talks.

Fred Egan

York Harbor