EU admits no real tariff negotiations with the US, only strategic compromise

Sabine Weyand, Director-General for Trade and Economic Security at the European Commission, has admitted that the EU did not truly “negotiate” with the United States on tariffs. Instead, she said, Europe conceded economically to Donald Trump in exchange for security guarantees.

In an interview with Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ Dossier) during the European Forum Alpbach, Weyand explained, “The European side was under enormous pressure to find a quick solution to stabilize transatlantic relations – especially regarding security guarantees.”

Emphasizing that Europe gave up economic gains to limit political damage, she added, “In reality, this was not a classic balance of interests but about securing a broader political package.”

The economic asymmetry—embodied by high tariffs on European exports and the absence of countermeasures—was deliberately accepted to avoid escalating tensions with Washington. “From the Commission’s perspective, this was not an ideal economic policy solution but a strategic assessment,” Weyand said. She added that the Commission plans to present proposals today (August 27) to reduce tariffs on US industrial goods and automobiles.

Addressing the war in Ukraine and wider geopolitical uncertainty, Weyand remarked, “There is a land war on the European continent, and we are entirely dependent on the United States. Member states were not willing to take the risk of further escalation that would result from European countermeasures.”

Pointing to the danger that the US could question its security partnership, she described the EU’s concessions as “an example of realistic politics at this turning point in history.” SZ Dossier noted that Weyand’s analysis highlights the “separation of economic rationality from geopolitical strategy,” with traditional reciprocity in trade giving way to political unity. “This marks the end of the postwar model,” the publication argued, noting that trade is now intertwined with security policy and supply chains with sovereignty claims.

“Dependencies are now seen as security risks. That is why trade relations are increasingly viewed through the lens of security policy,” Weyand said. She believes the post-1945 economic order will not return and insists it is “gone forever.” While Donald Trump is not solely responsible, she argued, structural changes have shifted perceptions: “Interdependence is no longer seen as a win-win. Dependencies are being weaponized.”

At the same forum, Nobel Prize–winning economist Joseph Stiglitz agreed that the old economic order had collapsed but rejected Weyand’s interpretation of the EU-US arrangement. “They agreed on a temporary truce, but don’t call it a deal. Trump never considered any agreement binding,” he said. Stiglitz stressed that Europe must protect itself not only against “US political arbitrariness” but also against distortions within its own markets. “There are massive corporate subsidies. I call this drip-feed economics on steroids,” he remarked.

Weyand, however, urged a calm approach to geopolitical risks, arguing that Europe’s economic security strategy should be based on “risk assessments, not gut feelings.” She stressed, “What we need is to be indispensable. Europe must become indispensable in global supply chains so that our dependencies cannot be used against us.”

Yet when asked if EU decision-making structures were prepared for such a strategy, she responded negatively: “We don’t have the right governance, nor the right mindset.” In her view, the EU often wastes valuable time because political awareness of risks emerges only once those risks materialize.