“Trump has absolutely created an opportunity to make Europe big again”

Interview || Here comes a “Swiss cheese” business agreement, with many holes, in the form of exemptions and sectoral exceptions, but will leave the trade war in cod waters. This is the bet of Mujtaba Rahman, executive director of the Eurasia Group Europa program that, a day before Donald Trump’s election, argued that the victory of the businessman made president of the US was what the EU needed to wake up. “At the time everyone shouted with me,” recalls the analyst to CNN Portugal. More than half a year later, he maintains what he said: “Trump has been the EU catalyst and for the EU” and even when it comes to Ukraine “Europe is now in a much better position” before the “change of posture” of the US administration in relation to Russia

With all twists, threat exchanges and delaying deadlines, what can we expect from trade negotiations between the European Union and the United States?

I think we are walking to a truce, and for truce I want to say an agreement between Europeans and Americans who will establish a base tariff of 10% to 15% with significant exemptions. In other words, a “Swiss cheese” agreement with many holes, which will include important sectoral exceptions and an American administration commitment that there is no more tariff restrictions. This will not be totally possible at the outset, but there will be a US signal to get there. It is suspected that this will allow the EU not to retaliate and continue the negotiations throughout this third quarter.

Considering the trade agreements already reached by the Trump administration, namely with Canada and the United Kingdom, where would you say that the agreement with the EU will be located? On the one hand, Canada was accused of, on the other many analysts, says the United Kingdom did what to the Americans because Trump was eager to have something he could announce as a victory…

When the united US-reaction was announced, the reaction of the EU responsible was that it was a disaster, which would never accept that reference value… but now Europeans are desperate for reaching an agreement and the UK agreement is the best possible scenario in the present context.

The point is that it is unlikely to be equivalent to the United Kingdom, in part because Trump is ideologically predisposed not to like the EU, he thinks that Europe is a commercial fortress, that the EU is weak, which is fundamentally enemy of American interests – and wants to punish Europe, because ideologically does not like the EU, so an agreement to the UK is difficult to achieve.

It is rumored that the EU retaliation could go through services – an industry in which, contrary to what happens with the trade in goods, the US registered a commercial surplus of $ 76 billion in 2024. Is it a realistic possibility?

The retaliation on US goods to EU’s goods took a long time to be agreed, and to target US service exports to the single European market would be much more controversial. I would say that this possibility is right at the top of a long staircase of tariff climbing. The EU will probably find a balance to tax 21 billion euros [de bens norte-americanos exportados para o mercado único] In a first round and later work very gradually. Only after that, in a very long period of time would the EU behold the services. This is a last resort.

Parallel to this trade war, the EU seems to be paying more attention to other markets and possible alliances-is trying to accelerate the deal with Mercosur, which is, is renewing the focus on the comprehensive and progressive agreement for transpacific partnership () … this sourness of the transatlantic relationship-in the context of the EU-e-e-either corresponding to-the opportunity for Europeans to diverse their sources of trade?

Yes, this is a great question. The trauma caused to the transatlantic alliance and, in particular, the damage caused to trade, represent opportunities for EU economic revitalization. There are three areas-commerce, defense and competitiveness-where Trump administration has already created opportunities, and we are already seeing this with additional expenses with national defense, with the actual attempt to consolidate the European industrial base, and we are also seeing it in commerce, with the commission striving to close the deal with Mercosur by the end of this year.

The commission is in the field of agriculture, but I have a feeling that if this collaboration does not result, it will try to go over France and Poland. There is also a new impetus to include investment provisions in the agreement with Canada – for now, it covers only goods, but there is a desire to also cover investments. And I would say that if the agreement with Mercosur is completed by the end of the year, the prospects for an EU agreement and others with the states of the Gulf will gain strength.

Regarding competitiveness, we are also starting to see the schedule advance, with simplification, the consolidation of the defense industry and the relaunch of the discussion of the union of the capital market, which has been long paralyzed. None of this would have happened without Trump – Trump has been the EU catalyst and to the EU.

One day before Trump’s election, he signed one to defend that having the former president back to the White House could be “the right thing to bring the EU back to his goal.”

And at the time everyone shouted with me! [risos]

So, more than half a year after Trump took possession, does it maintain this opinion?

Fully. Trump has absolutely created an opportunity to make Europe big again. Through the threats it raised from NATO, in relation to Ukraine, in trade, through all this, Trump forced Europe to seriously think of ways to reinforce its global commercial power. It is an important catalyst, although the political challenge is difficult.

In this path of opportunities, there are also those who argue that this trade war is an opportunity to trade between the different EU member states. Do you agree?

Notice, the Draghi report is the Bible, right? Everyone in Europe accepts the prognosis, and the question now is whether the commission can advance with this agenda in the light of fundamental constraints, political constraints at the national level. But what is already seen, when it comes to Draghi’s agenda, is that some elements are advancing, such as those I have mentioned, namely the defense industrial policy, as well as the transition to the renewable energies that began in Von Der Leyen’s first term. The areas where we are still having difficulty are the union of capital markets and artificial intelligence technological policies – compared to the US, European startups continue to face difficulties, but it is wrong to think that Draghi’s agenda is not moving forward.

Last March, in the context of support for Ukraine, that the EU has “a longtime problem called Viktor Orbán” that needs to be solved quickly …

I think he will lose power in April next year there will be elections in Hungary, so it is possible that this problem is solved by itself; There will be possibly a minority government and a very well organized opposition, so there is a good hypothesis that much of the problem is solved by itself. That said, if this is not the case, it is very likely that the EU has to reinforce sanctions against Hungary and eventually activate what suspends rights such as the right to vote.

Speaking of Ukraine, how do you look at Trump’s latest threat, to apply 100% rates to countries that do business with Russia if Moscow doesn’t close a peace agreement in 50 days?

All US administrations need to learn to deal with Russia from scratch and this also applies to Trump administration. This idea that the US is the referee [na guerra da Rússia contra a Ucrânia] It is over and no one already believes that there are business opportunities in the normalization of relations with Russia. See what happened to the, which provides for sanctions to Russia, which is being supported by the two parties and that the Trump administration is now considering.

I think Trump’s position on Putin is changing, the position of this administration in relation to Russia and Ukraine is changing – first, because there is no desire to normalize relationships, since there are no real business opportunities and, secondly, because there is enormous political and popular support [dentro dos EUA] to Ukraine and against Russia. So I think the position has evolved. And it also puts Europe in a much better position than the one it was in a few months.