The European Union spent last year to elaborate secret plans for what the block would have done if President Trump had maintained his threats to impose higher rates on European goods and services.
Now, since those threats go from hypothetical to potentially imminent, its plans are becoming widely focused.
Specific sectors to hit, politically sensitive – such as the products made in the Republican states – with targeted rates intended to inflict maximum pain. Do not intensify in a tit-for-tat competition if it is avoidable. Move quickly and definitely, potentially using new tactics that could affect service providers such as large Silicon Valley technological companies.
It is an approximate playbook – described in general by three diplomats who required anonymity because the plans were still under discussion – that Europe would prefer not to use. The first goal is to avoid a commercial war by offering to negotiate and listen to carrots, including several European purchases of American gas, for which Trump has pushed. EU officials warned that a commercial war between the blockade and the United States would be a self -harm disaster that would cost both sides and would benefit geopolitical rivals such as China and Russia.
But Mr. Trump kept the continent in her crossed hair, saying this week that the block “certainly” would be the face rates and “very soon”. If pacification fails, Europe is transmitting that it is ready to hit.
“We are prepared,” said Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, during a press conference this week in Brussels, when he was asked if he was ready to reject the tariff increases by the new American administration.
The Commission, the executive arm of the block, remained at low lips on which products it could hit with higher rates even when it meets the ambassadors and other diplomats of the EU countries, said the three diplomats, which were informed about large ideas Developed by the so -called Trump Task Force. The block has 27 member countries and shared plans too widely are probably leaks, eliminating their strategic advantage.
But several guiding principles are increasingly clear, they said two diplomats, the result of both the work of the commission’s task force and the experience collected by the first mandate of Mr. Trump. Diplomics asked for anonymity to discuss politically sensitive issues.
The first idea is that the rates would most likely be targeted, whether this means placing in certain sectors or geography products. In 2018, for example, Europe reacted to the steel and aluminum rates, hitting the American whiskey with a great fare, which damaged the Kentucky Bourbon industry and, therefore, a critical election college for Mitch McConnell, a Republican of the Kentucky which was then the leader of the majority in the Senate.
A second idea is to disconcert the response, start or cllvate the retaliation only if some triggers or passed dates are satisfied, two diplomats have said. Moving deliberately provides greater lever, said a diplomat and avoids an immediate and painful commercial effect.
The third is that the answers would not necessarily be tit-per-tat, according to all three diplomats. If Mr. Trump orders a 20 percentage rate through the edge in Europe, this does not mean that Europe must respond with a 20 percentage rate through the edge in the United States. The EU still wants to respect the global commercial rules supported by the World Trade Organization, which could suggest a more surgical approach.
An option on the table is the use of an “anti-coercion tool”, a relatively new legal framework that would allow the blockage to quickly direct the large providers of American services-as large technological companies-with the rates.
In force since 2023, the tool allows the EU to use “a wide range of possible countermeasures” such as higher customs duties or import limits when another country damages the European industry in an attempt to exercise pressure on the government and cause political changes or politicians. The idea is to allow blocking to respond to manipulative political pressure rapidly and severely.
The Financial Times has initially reported that the Commission could use the tool to affect service providers, including large technological companies of Silicon Valley, in response to American rates. Two of the diplomats confirmed that the use of the instrument was discussed, although far from a safe plan.
They said that going on with the tool could be too drastic of an option because the final goal of Europe is not to inflame a total commercial war.
For now, it is impossible for Europe to solidify a reaction plan. The simple reason: nobody knows what Mr. Trump will do.
“They want to make an agreement – I think they are still very uncertain about what the real goals are,” said Jörn Fleck, senior director of Central Europe at the Research Group The Atlantic Council.
In addition, EU leaders sometimes fought to bring Washington to the phone. Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, was invited to meet foreign ministers, but did not do it, even if he had a call with the best diplomat of the block, Kaja Kallas. Mrs. Von der Leyen did not meet Mr. Trump from the inauguration in January.
Although Mr. Trump did not say how the rates in Europe would be, he repeatedly said that he wants Europe to buy more American cars and agricultural products, in addition to gas.
This left Europe by offering incentives in an attempt to reject the commercial war before you start. The officials were clear that they are arranged – even ready – to buy more American fuel. Officials are already trying to find a way for the diversity of their energy sources while the continent moves away from Russian gas.
“We still receive a lot of GNL from Russia and why not replace it from the American GN”, said Mrs. Von der Leyen in the days following Mr. Trump, referring to the liquefied natural gas.
European officials have also claimed to buy multiple American defense products while military spending on the blocking level increase. The highest military expenses are, in part, an answer to Trump, who insisted on the fact that European nations spend more for NATO.
And when it comes to Greenland – an autonomous territory of Denmark, an EU member, which Trump wants to annex for his strategic importance – the Europeans have underlined that they are open to invest more on the island.
“I totally agree with the Americans that North High, that the Arctic Region is becoming increasingly important when we talk about defense, security and deterrence,” said Frederiksen, Prime Minister of Denmark, in Brussels this week. “And you can find a way to guarantee stronger imprints in Greenland.”
Above all, European leaders have tried to remind America how important the relationship between the EU and the United States is, both economically and for global peace.
Not only the EU, if treated as a block, the most important American commercial partner. It is also an important importer of American services and, since officials have repeatedly underlined in the last few days, European companies take millions of Americans.
“A lot is at stake for both sides,” said Mrs. Von der Leyen this week.
But he added that “we will always protect our interests, however and every time it is necessary”.
Ana Swanson Contributed relationships.