Hosted by Christina Ruffini and Sir Richard Dearlove
Guest
Episode Summary
The U.S. Supreme Court just struck down President Trump's reciprocal tariffs — so what happens next? Former MI6 Chief Sir Richard Dearlove and Baroness Ayesha Hazarika break down Trump's options to reimpose his tariff regime, what it means for trade negotiators worldwide, and why international leaders who flew to Washington may have wasted their time.
Plus: Will US intel lead the front of the war against Mexican drug cartels? What role will the Board of Peace play on the global stage beyond Gaza? Is the United Nations still an important force in geopolitics?
In this episode:
What’s next for President Trump’s tariffs after the U.S. Supreme Court’s sweeping decision
Knock-on effects to watch for following the killing of Mexican cartel leader Nemesio Oseguera, aka “El Mencho”
The role President Trump’s Board of Peace may play in the rebuilding of Gaza
The diminished relevance of the United Nations in world affairs
Hosted by Sir Richard Dearlove (former MI6 Chief) and Baroness Ayesha Hazarika (Member of the House of Lords).
Listen & Subscribe
- Watch on YouTube
- Listen on Apple Podcasts
- Listen on Spotify
Transcript
INTRODUCTION
Hazarika: Hello, and welcome to One Decision In Brief. I'm your host, Ayesha Hazarika, a broadcaster and a member of the House of Lords, Baroness Hazarika, and I'm joined by host, Sir Richard Dearlove. Hello, Richard.
Dearlove: Hello, Ayesha. Very good to be with you.
Hazarika: Now we've got a couple of topics that we want to get through, but let's begin with a really important story, and this is the US Supreme Court striking down Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs. What did you make of that ruling, Richard?
THE SUPREME COURT TARIFF RULING
Dearlove: Well, I don't think it was particularly surprising. It was a six-three decision in the Supreme Court. But if you look in the cold light of day at the interpretation of the powers that the president used to impose tariffs, it was a very questionable decision. So despite the fact you've got a highly conservative Supreme Court with a significant, let's say, right-leaning majority, they still found against Trump. And I think as lawyers, they had really no option. Despite the fact that that decision was anticipated, I think we are cast into chaos to an extent because it seems from Trump's subsequent comments that he wants to, as it were, go back and reimpose tariffs at a general level under new powers, which would, as it were — or, let's say, I shouldn't say new powers, under different powers.
Hazarika: It's said that he wants to impose 15% tariffs using the 1974 Trade Act as a temporary solution?
Dearlove: So I think we're in a very confusing situation. I mean, I'm staying here in Aspen with people who are international businessmen. And in terms of the impact, on the one I was talking to within the last couple of days, he's very excited because he has manufacturing capabilities in Vietnam, and the change in tariffs bring a lot of credit back to his business. So it cuts in different directions. Whereas in the UK, we thought we had a tariff deal, and we're now faced with a completely different situation, which has to be renegotiated. So all those international statesmen who streamed into DC to get a deal under the tariffs find that their time and energy was wasted because they now face a new problem. So I would sort of describe this as tariff chaos, with the Trump administration hanging on very strongly to the concept of tariffs. And being here in the States at the moment and watching the media, there are plenty of manufacturers in the States who are fed up with the Supreme Court because they did see the tariffs as protecting the reestablishment of certain manufacturing businesses. So, gosh, what a confusing situation, which will take at least another six to eight months to play out into some sort of clarity.
Hazarika: And certainly, from a sort of UK government point of view, I mean, it was felt that Keir Starmer and his team had done a really great job to get these 10% tariffs. And that was a great feather in the cap of Keir Starmer, who is obviously having quite a difficult time at the moment. And I certainly know trade negotiators who are just exhausted at the fact that they've got to start the whole process again. I mean, it's very — actually, if you are a trade minister or you're a trade negotiator, this is relentless at the moment, and the uncertainty is very difficult for, you know, policymakers and business as well.
Dearlove: Yep. Absolutely agree. So I think we're in a very confused situation, which to trading nations with large relationships with the United States is very, very difficult and will be a high political priority. And as you say, the trade negotiators, we have to, as it were, express our sympathy for their frustration.
Hazarika: You being in America at the moment, what do ordinary people think about tariffs? Is this a story which is cut through to everyday people? And do you think an issue like this will have an impact as America moves towards the midterms?
Dearlove: Well, clearly, the midterms are of crucial importance politically. And, yeah, everybody is holding their breath to see how these issues will play out electorally. And we've got until November. That's a long time in politics. I think the tariff issue will have impact locally in areas, both where there's support for the tariffs and where there's opposition for the tariffs. But whether that's a general movement across the whole country, I would doubt, frankly.
Hazarika: Well, it's gonna be really interesting to see how world leaders react to this, you know, tariff chaos, as you said, and whether they will once again make a beeline to be on bended knee to see if they can cut a new deal with Trump. It's gonna be fascinating to see how they deal with this round of the tariffs and whether they do the same thing or they try a different strategy.
Dearlove: Yeah. Agreed.
MEXICO AND THE CARTELS
Hazarika: Let's now move on to what's happening in Mexico because that's something which is really important. Latin America has really become quite a geopolitical hotspot, hasn't it, Richard?
Dearlove: Absolutely. And I think, you know, this is once again the result of US pressure on its Latin American neighbors. Because my understanding is that there's been a huge intervention by the Trump administration in Mexico in pressing the Sheinbaum government to really take an aggressive line on the cartels. And the killing of this character, Jose Guerra, in the Jalisco province of Mexico is, I think, hugely important because it's being reported here in the United States as an initiative based on US intelligence. And maybe it does indicate that the Mexican government is under such pressure from the US. They're gonna take on the cartels in a very serious fashion. And I think what is surprising, and that's been all over the media in the last twenty-four hours here, is that the sort of violence and dislocation that this incident has caused, with airports being closed, US citizens on holiday in Mexico being advised to remain in their accommodation. You've got, you know, burning buses on the streets of the city where this intervention happened. I mean, it's a pretty consequential event for people here in the United States. And, of course, it does indicate the seriousness of the grip that the cartels have had on aspects of the Mexican economy and, you know, Trump's insistence that there should be, as it were, a new frontline opened up, and I think that's what we're seeing. The drug enforcement authorities, I think, obviously, have been targeting this guy and have pressed the Mexicans to go after him. Let's see what the follow-ons and knock-ons are. But I think we should expect this to be a more general initiative, not just one against one cartel.
TRUMP'S BOARD OF PEACE AND THE UNITED NATIONS
Hazarika: Let's now move on to another very important geopolitical issue, and this is Donald Trump's new Board of Peace and Gaza negotiations. Now, lots of major allies, France and the United Kingdom, have not accepted the invitation. How do you think this Board of Peace is going to play out, Richard, if it isn't fully represented in terms of the America's usual ally, sort of, suspects?
Dearlove: Well, I think it's a sort of board for the reconstruction of Gaza. And, of course, it's typical Trump to give it some grandiose title and to invest it with apparently much more significance than the one issue which seems to be on its agenda at the moment. And, of course, you have got, unsurprisingly, you know, the permanent members of the UN Security Council, France and the UK, saying, hang on a moment. You know, this is a crossover, and we don't want to confuse this Trump initiative with the primacy of the United Nations.
Hazarika: Do you think that's why he set this up, to undermine the primacy of the United Nations?
Dearlove: I mean, if you look at some of the ideologues of the Trump administration, they lost patience with the United Nations. The, as it were, even hand that the United Nations tends to express towards regimes which are highly questionable in terms of their legitimacy. And I mean, I can give you an example recently with the Iranian regime and its representation on certain international committees. And I think this sort of thing drives the ideologues of the Trump administration mad. And, I mean, I would make the general observation in my own experience that the role of the UN, because of the reluctance of US participation, has actually shrunk massively over the last fifteen to twenty years. So there's no question that the UN, in a way, as a consequential player in geopolitics, has shrunk. If you think of the importance of UN declarations, if you go back to the war in Iraq and all of those events, and the way that the United Nations acts now, it's very, very different. And I don't think Trump has much patience. And, of course, the Security Council is pretty much gridlocked because of the ability of one member to veto any significant initiative which doesn't sort of fit either with Russian or Chinese, let's say, priorities. I think there are two issues here. You know, the Board of Peace, Gaza, but a much bigger issue about the decline of the United Nations and how that will play out over time. So it is very significant. And I think what's interesting, I mean, looking at the photographs and the coverage of the Board of Peace, you can see Tony Blair himself sitting there. You know? And I guess he would justify his participation by pointing specifically to the Gaza-Palestinian issue in which he personally has been so heavily involved in his career. So I have some sympathy with him actually joining it because it's probably better for him to try to influence these changes and these initiatives than sit on one side and just make criticism that the Board of Peace is a confusion with the United Nations.
Hazarika: Yeah. I agree with that. I mean, he's received a lot of criticism for taking part, but I think he has a deeply held view that he has — whether you agree with him or not in terms of what he's done in the Middle East, he's got a huge amount of history there and he's got a lot of connections and he feels that he does want to contribute. But of course, you know, it's been much criticized. But I think your point about the UN is so fascinating because there is no question that the UN feels completely impotent right now. And you've got this real paradox where you've got a completely impotent United Nations at a time when there is so much conflict going on in the world and geopolitics is on the lips of everybody these days. There's so many things going on across the world. And it does feel a great shame that the UN feels so weakened. And it doesn't feel like anybody really has a huge amount of confidence in the structure or the institution of the United Nations anymore.
Dearlove: No. I absolutely agree with that. You know, one has the feeling that maybe the institution has run its political course and something needs to replace it, but it certainly isn't the Board of Peace.
Hazarika: And I would just say this as a feminist, looking around the Board of Peace, not one woman around the table, which I think irked quite a lot of people as well.
Dearlove: Yeah. I mean, I think that's very indicative of — there's a sort of partisan, and I mean that in the broader sense, conception of the organization. And, okay, if it's a rebuilding committee for Gaza, it possibly has a purpose, but I don't see it generating much other sort of good in the world beyond that.
Hazarika: Well, that's all for this episode. And do make sure you join us this Thursday because we've got a really fascinating conversation which will look in-depth at what's happening in Iran and, of course, Ukraine as, you know, we mark the fourth anniversary of that conflict. Now for more conversations with leading decision makers and thinkers, check out 1decision.com and our YouTube page, where you'll find additional commentaries, conversations and explainers. I'm Ayesha Hazarika. Thank you for listening.
