Trump’s mercantilism risks America’s global leadership

“I have a chronic, incurable trade deficit with my barber,” prominent Washington Post columnist George Will told HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher last week.

- Frank F Islam

“Once a month ... I buy a haircut from her; she buys nothing from me. She has a trade deficit with Iowa because she buys corn products and pork. And no Iowan ever comes to Washington to get a haircut. Amazingly, it works—somehow!”

Nothing captures US President Donald Trump's approach to trade better than Will's quip, delivered with his trademark dry wit. Will, a stalwart of classic conservative thought, grasps a truth the current administration seems determined to ignore: Trade is not a zero-sum game. For centuries, individuals, cities, and nations have prospered not by balancing every ledger entry to the penny, but by engaging in voluntary exchanges that benefit both parties.

Trump's unapologetically mercantile view of trade and foreign relations turns every economic relationship into a scoreboard. Whether it's imposing a 25% tariff on Indian goods — followed by an additional levy linked to New Delhi's purchase of Russian oil —or threatening Nato allies over defence spending, his policies reduce complex alliances to crude profit-and-loss statements.

The consequences go far beyond economics. The US did not ascend to global preeminence by browbeating partners over trade balances when it emerged as a global leader after the end of World War II; it did that by cultivating relationships and influence through alliances, cultural diplomacy, and a rules-based order that reassured friends and allies they could trust Washington's commitments. From the Marshall Plan to Nato to the Fulbright Program, American leadership has been rooted in building confidence, not collecting payments.