Drew Delong, the global bulletin of geopolitical dynamics in the consultant Kerney, provides advice to executives and directors of the Board of Directors about the movement of instability through national and other global risks to their institutions. With the beginning of his profession at the White House and the Foreign Ministry during the Trump administration’s first administration, Delong joined Kirney in 2021. He offers his definition, the relationship of the United States of China, the European Union’s circulation bloc and the United States, and made the capital of the new country.
Global Financial Affairs: What did you see in crystallization in the first Trump administration that now seems like American industrial policy?
Dru Delong: At the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there was a discussion about the competition of great powers, the United States and China. There was also this increasing trend of industrial coordination – and on the economic side, a very emerging recognition by the United States of uneven play space. At that time, we saw a reaction by the Trump administration to Huawei and ZTE.
The first time, we saw a tariff of steel and aluminum. There were some work on cars, but it did not come into effect. Now we have a copper tariff and cars in place. It is very likely that we will see semiconductors and medicines that come online. There are many others in the pipeline: aircraft, aircraft parts, heavy trucks, heavy truck parts, drones, polycolicon, wood, wood, and wind turbines. I think the administration has four or six others in the loading bay has not been announced.
These (movements) gives a very clear indication that it does not matter where you bring your product from; We want these things here. It gives a very clear road map to the place where the administration wants to accelerate the re -equipment.
GF: How does the strategic economic bloc arose between the United States and the European Union with these plans?
Delong: It was fascinated when the US-European Union joint statement (last month) was issued. They did not really neglect the words: the United States and the European Union will work together to confront the third countries using critical mineral export controls. The statement talks about the annular stabbing of the economies of excessive ability.
For the United States now, it appears that the strategic bloc is formed at some level in the critical industries. The European Union has committed $ 40 billion in the US-CHP purchases from the United States, at a value of $ 750 billion in energy. There are things like general pharmaceutical preparations that are treated at the lowest MFN threshold (the most preferred nation) and pharmaceutical brokers that are not given any major tariff. This is a direct snapshot of China’s practice of redefining a productive country of origin, to ensure that the beneficiaries of this deal are the United States and the European Union.
What does this mean? It is a budget, in many ways, China’s strategy for being an economy moved by export and achieving 5 % local GDP growth by reaching the European Union (and other regions). This means, in many cases, the trading of military partnership in Europe for economic partnership. I can draw a scenario where, after four years from now, things look completely different.
GF: Are American negotiators focusing China out of the market?
Delong: It is a sensitive and sensitive game. What China did on the rare land export controls, I can’t emphasize enough, many people woke up. These export controls came on the Internet and this industry took care of, because (companies) stopped obtaining their rare land. I started receiving phone calls, and colleagues started receiving phone calls, “What do we do?”
Within a month or two, I saw that the US Department of Defense became the best interest in stocks in MP materials. I have seen startups in North Carolina, announcing a huge series of a chain that was raised on a vertical and non -Shipe ground supply chains. Lee colleagues are now flying to Zambia to secure the Tungsten mines.
I think there is a duplication that occurs inside the White House. Trump wants a deal with China. He wants this at the Summit of your father (Asia and the Pacific of Economic Cooperation) at the end of October. The extension of 90 days (the deadline for the Chinese tariff) that was granted during the past two weeks interferes with the APEC summit. Tiktok is still working. The White House launched a Tiktok account as a kind of vote on confidence. A lot of things now happen clearly like Trump says, “O China, here.”
On the other hand, you also have the United States that sends messages to everyone in Southeast Asia to discourage shipping. There is a boost to get China out of other economies. They really want to close the valves to increase the width. It is a direct blow against what China is trying to do to support the growth of GDP by 5 %. You also have the United States government to pay open access to American technologies in China Mainland.
GF: What is the advice it provides to Canadian companies that face significant tariff effects on their business?
Delong: One of them was compatible with the USMCA agreement (USA -Mexico – Canada). If you are compatible and beaten from Section 232 (the American Trade Law that restricts imports), you will continue to strike a little, but not as much. In Canada in the past six months, you have been more than six years than the past six years. I spoke with some customers, and 80 % of their supplies from the United States. If you are now dividing in Canada importing from the United States and putting things on shelves, you are exposed to retaliatory definitions. On the market side of things: Given that it is an American product, people do not want to buy it, so it will strike on both sides.
Within six months, when the USMCA is reassessed, I hope that the Canadian Prime Minister (Mark) Kareni will come to the table with the President of Mexico (Claudia) Shinbom and to re -investigate the USMCA together.
GF: Are there companies that come to you completely when it comes to learn the impact of definitions on their products, exports or businesses?
Delong: I will be surprised if there is any room or executive team that has not done a kind of customs tariff analysis at this stage. I think companies still wrap their heads about the fact that, sometimes, there are pieces placed on the blackboard after that. They are once: Colombia does not accept a plane of deported immigrants; Trump threatens during the weekend to put a higher tariff on Colombia. If you import coffee from Colombia, you are calling an emergency meeting on Sunday afternoon, and at Sunday evening, the tariff disappears. Berri.
There are also things that the administration is associated with; At those moments, I try to emphasize that it is important to look at both the tree and the forest. Example medications. The White House sent 17 letter to pharmaceutical executives who are imposed on dropping drug prices in the United States, and to launch a direct model for consumers of their drugs, and that they are accessing Medicare, Medicaid and Thred-Arty platforms. It is a big huge change for Big Pharma players. As you say in the same message, but we will work with you to use the American trade representative to go to Europe and ensure that these prices are raised.
GF: The United States government has a 10 % stake in Intel. On the side of companies, does this cause people’s concern?
Delong: You have the management now says, “Well, we may do it more.” I got the Minister of Commerce, saying: “We will consider doing more of these to the Ministry of Defense or Defense Controls,” for example.
I think DOD share in the stock field in MP materials is radically different from what we saw with Intel: take a royal rights site in the company that is absent from the critical search and development course and thus the United States was placed in the position of deprived national security on critical technology.
Currently, if you look at the immediate price on many rare land, it is higher than the immediate price of repeated materials, which will not have meaning in nature. But because there are many incentives, the market is not in a balance. The Ministry of Defense comes and puts a price for the price and says: “We will buy everything you can achieve at this price so that MP materials can work. Everything is higher than a specific price (it is part of) the profit sharing agreement.” This, for me, is trying to address a series of market failures.
There is a basic question at the present time that the industry will have to weigh. Will the United States adopt a state of state -backed capitalism as you will support national heroes in industries that are the priorities of national security?
