Donald Trump’s Protectionist Trade Policy from the ...

JURNAL HUBUNGAN INTERNASIONALVOL 7 NO 2 OKTOBER 2018 - MARET 2019

INTRODUCTIONDuring his speech in February 2017 the United States

(US) President Donald Trump argued that many coun-tries have benefited from relatively-low import tariff im-

posed by US authority so they could sell their commodi-ties as much as they can while they imposed high taxes forUS exports (Schwartz 2017) Available data supported him

Donald Trumprsquos Protectionist TradePolicy from the Perspective of EconomicNationalism

Azza BimantaraInstitute of International Studies Department of International RelationsUniversitas Gadjah MadaBulaksumur Yogyakarta 55281azzabimantaragmailcomSubmitted 19 October 2018 accepted 30 January 2019

AbstrakArtikel ini menganalisis kebijakan perdagangan proteksionis Amerika Serikat (AS) di bawah kepemimpinan Donald Trump Dengan menerapkansejumlah tarif dan kuota terhadap impor pertanian dan manufaktur Trump memantik perang dengan sejumlah rekan dagang penting duniaProblematisasi pertama isu ini ialah kebijakan perdagangan Trump gagal menekan mitra-mitra dagangnya untuk patuh meski ekspor merekalebih bergantung pada pasar AS dibandingkan sebaliknya Yang kedua ialah sebagian besar lawan perang dagang Trump merupakan negarademokratis hal ini merupakan anomali terhadap asumsi yang telah mapan tentang teori perdamaian demokratis bahwa struktur dan normayang dipegang negara-negara demokratis mencegah mereka terlibat dalam konfrontasi politik-keamanan dan ekonomi Melalui nasionalismeekonomi dalam perspektif historis serta kerangka analisis nasionalisme dialektika lsquoHegelianrsquo nasionalisme artikel ini berargumen bahwakebijakan perdagangan proteksionis Donald Trump dapat dianggap sebagai upaya untuk tidak hanya melindungi kepentingan ekonominasional tetapi juga mengamankan kekuasaan politiknya di hadapan para konstituen beserta tuntutannya di level nasional Manifestasitersebut dapat dilacak ke belakang hingga ke konstruksi nasionalisme Amerika yang menunjukkan kesejarahan dari pragmatisme AS terhadapekonomi politik globalKata kunci Donald Trump nasionalisme ekonomi proteksionisme kebijakan perdagangan negara dan pasar

AbstractThis article aims to analyze the United Statesrsquo protectionist trade policies under Donald Trumprsquos administration By imposing a set of tariffsand quotas for such imported agriculture and manufactured products he triggered a series of trade war to several world key tradingpartners The first problematization of this issue is that Trumprsquos trade policies failed to push compliances from its trade partner despite theirhigher relative export dependency on American market rather than on the contrary The second is most of Trumprsquos lsquotrade belligerentsrsquo aredemocratic countries therefore it becomes an anomaly to the prominent assumption of democratic peace theory which stated that struc-tures and norms held by democratic countries prevent them from engaging both in harsh political-security and economic confrontationThrough the historical perspective of economic nationalism combined with an analytical framework of lsquoHegelianrsquo dialectics of nationalismthis article argues that Donald Trumprsquos protectionist trade policy can be considered as an attempt to not only protect national economicinterest but also to secure his political power before his constituents and their national postulation Such manifestation can be traced backto the construction of American nationalism that shows US historical pragmatic standpoint toward the global political economyKeywords Donald Trump economic nationalism protectionism trade policy state and market

httpsdoiorg1018196hi72132


by showing that the US trade deficit to the world increasedfrom USD 73658 billion in 2016 to USD 79569 billionin 2017 (US Census Bureau 2018) In this context Chinain 2016 and 2017 became the most contributor with itstrade gap reaching from USD 347 billion (436 of UStotal world trade deficit) to USD 3752 billion (4715)(US Census Bureau 2018) The European Union (EU)Mexico Japan Vietnam Malaysia India South KoreaThailand Canada and Taiwan also become the next topcontributors by sharing around 57-58 of US total of worldtrade deficit

President Trumprsquos unease concern about such unfairinternational trade structure faced by the US was trans-lated into protectionist policies He ordered US Interna-tional Trade Commission (USITC) US Department ofCommerce (DoC) and US Trade Representative (USTR)to study about the potential harm done by trade partnerstoward US market and intellectual properties US govern-ment uses Section 201 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974

and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 Untilthis paper is written Trumprsquos safeguard trade policies tar-geted China Canada Mexico EU and South Korea asthe US lsquotrade belligerentsrsquo Cited from Bown and Kolb(2018) US imposed tariffs and quotas on imported steel(10) aluminum (25) washing machine solar paneland more than 1300 other products This trade policythen provokes those targeted countries to retaliate SouthKorea sued the US through the World Trade Organiza-tion (WTO) dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) for thewashing machine and the solar panelrsquos feud (WTO 2018)Mexico imposed tariffs on US potato apple cheese porkand dairy products worth approximately USD 3 billion(Swanson amp Tankersley 2018) Canada also imposed tar-iffs for USD 128 billion US steel aluminum tomato saucemaple syrup and orange juice exports (Canadian Depart-ment of Finance 2018) EU taxes US Harley Davidsonbourbon jeans and cranberries 25 of their worth (Bown2018) China the US biggest trade partner imposed more

Table 1 US EDR on trade belligerents 2016-2017

Table 2 EDR of trade belligerents on US 2016-2017

191

complex measures Beside US fruits and nuts pork andscrap steel and aluminum worth USD 24 billion (Lu ampSchott 2018) Chinese authority released 106-commodi-ties list for 25 tariffs worth USD 45 billion (Ministry ofCommerce of P R China 2018) A series of global tradewar then triggered

There are two problematizations of this issue FirstPresident Trumprsquos trade policy rationalization is based onthe logic that US government will be able to push theirtrade interest toward countries whose exports are moredependent on US market than the opposite way It can beshown through export dependency ratio (EDR) which in-dicates a percentage of a countryrsquos total export to certainpartner country from exporting-countryrsquos total gross na-tional productGNP (Zeng 2004) Ipso facto the averageof USrsquos EDR toward trade belligerents during 2016-2017only ranged from 088-567 despite the increasing trend(see Table 1) Meanwhile the trade belligerentsrsquo EDRs to-ward the US get a higher range (252-2826) despite thedecreasing trend on the same period (US Census Bureau2018 CEIC 2018 see Table 2) However the situationdid not occur as expected President Trumprsquos tariff policyis immediately retaliated by similar or even more complexmeasures Second four out of the five countries involvedin Trumprsquos trade war are democratic countries The situa-tion somehow lsquofalsifiedrsquo democratic peace theory whichassumes that structure and norms held by democratic coun-tries prevent them from engaging in a large scale of con-flicting relations in both political security (Doyle 1983)and economy (Zeng 2004)

This paper aims to highlight President Trumprsquos recentprotectionist trade policy with the following research ques-tion why does Donald Trump implement the protection-ist policy to US foreign trade The hypothetical answer forthis question is that Donald Trumprsquos protectionist tradepolicy (tariffs and quotas) can be considered as an attemptto not only protect national economic interest but also tosecure his political power before his constituents and theirnational postulation To answer this question the expla-nation structured in several parts After explaining theeconomic nationalism that will be utilized as a theoreticalframework the article will divide the summarized construc-tion of American nationalism in both political and eco-

nomic sense It will be useful as a historical modality forthe contemporary discourse of American nationalismbrought by Trump during his campaign and presidencyThe comparative result will be correlated to the trade policy-making conducted by President Trump

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKThere are two reasons why this paper chooses economic

nationalism as a theoretical framework First historicalreferences show that protectionist trade policy has beenconducted by most of the countries like the US during thelate 18th century British Germany and Japan during the19th century their economies depended on statersquos inter-vention and protectionist measures Only when theireconomies become mature they open their market andpropagate free and fair trade to expand their productionand market (Chang 2002) Even when the global economycollapsed during the 1930s Great Depression their hypoc-risies led them to pursue protectionist policy Empiricallyspeaking it will be useful to study the phenomenon of so-called lsquoTrumponomicsrsquo from the perspective of economicnationalism Second Steve Bannon who held the admin-istrative position as Senior Counsel to the President atthat time described President Trumprsquos economic nation-alism policy blatantly as anti-thesis to economic globaliza-tion trade protectionism political pressure on the domes-tic corporation unilateralism and economic relationsbased on transactional deals (Chu 2017)

Before discussing economic nationalism we need tounderstand the concept of nation and nationalism A na-tion is an imagined community which is inherently lim-ited and sovereign (Anderson 2006) It is limited becausethe lsquoimaginationrsquo only comprises individuals who shareda similar history geographical location language ethnicitycustom and even religion It is sovereign as a consequenceof two things First due to its lsquoimaginativersquo limitation ifnot exclusive a nation is prone to focus only on its inter-nal cohesion A nation will not try hard to enlarge its cov-erage to cover the whole humanity quantitatively and quali-tatively It will be confusing if a nation tends to be abso-lutely inclusive in terms of accepting all quantities andqualities of individuals compared to humanity as generalSecond a nation is in fact a derived product of the Euro-


pean Westphalian system in the 17th century The systemcreates a new modern polity called state which is self-gov-erned It means that this political regime insists every pol-ity respect each otherrsquos sovereignty by not interfering withothersrsquo domestic affairs (Polimpung 2014)

Those characteristics of a nation thus affect our under-standing of nationalism Nationalism is understood as anideology in which there is an effort to mobilize the wholepolitical economic and cultural resources to reach a na-tional unity The unity can be obtained through identityconstruction (Anderson 2006) or acquisition of particu-lar territory in order to establish nation-state (Gellner1983) In particular nation-state can be considered as anultimate purpose for statesmen to follow Using national-ism as lsquopolitical vehiclersquo they mobilize society into accept-ing offered national construction If society agrees to af-firm agreed lsquoimagined communityrsquo power relation occurswhere statesmen or political elites become a subject ofnation-state power and society with new national identityas their objects The whole process can be seen throughthe framework of Hegelian Dialectics in Figure 1

Figure 1 lsquoHegelian Dialecticsrsquo of Nationalism

Source Nakano (2004)

Back to the nationalist purpose in economic aspectnational unity requires whole economic resource Theeconomy is considered as a statersquos instrument in accumu-lating power aimed at mobilizing a nation and even toassess the statersquos legitimacy toward a nation However al-most all economic activities related to market mechanismwhich is said to work efficiently only by avoiding externalinterventions By conditioning economy as power accu-mulation instrument nationalism demands nation-stateto intervene market mechanism This is where (nation-)state and market can relate inter-sectionally state priori-tizes security by demonstrating its power to organize its

citizens for (national) unit while market needs to accumu-late and distribute growing wealth efficiently without ex-ternal intervention However state-market relations are notalways monotonic It is due to every nationrsquos differing ex-perience regarding national unity It will affect the waythey interpret market (international trade developmentissues and financial monetary and fiscal affairs) and itsrelations toward nationalism Every nation can be differ-ent in deciding whether a statersquos authority must be pre-ferred to market or the opposite way or being balancedinstead (Strange 2015) As a consequence there are manypossibilities to see whether domestic and internationaltrade can be considered as anti-thesis substitutive comple-mentary or even integrativemdashas we will realize through thispaper Despite such differences state-market relation interms of nationalism demands a certain degree of stateintervention on economic activities because the economywill be directed for nationalist purposes Therefore we canconclude from given logic that economic nationalism canbe understood as a set of policies conducted by a state byinterfering market mechanism partially or as a whole inthe name of national interest

This paper uses economic nationalism as a theoreticalframework in a couple of ways First it identifies the con-struction of American nationalism based on its historicityand discourse It is useful to give an ideological and politi-cal basis for further explication regarding Trumprsquos nation-alism In this context this paper will use literature reviewsas data which refers American socio-political history somestatistical information about US demography and indi-vidual andor official statesmen from political elites andother stakeholders from any media source (onoffline)Secondly this paper tries to correlate economic national-ism with its implication toward the way Trumprsquos adminis-tration see trade relations and structure with other trad-ing partners This paper will use statistical data about thewhole trade balance and each related commodityrsquos marketconfiguration and officialacademic statesmen regardingUS trade policies under Trumprsquos administration This partis crucial in order to see the correlation between politico-ideological and economic aspects of contemporary Ameri-can nationalism

193

RESULT AND ANALYSESAMERICAN NATIONALISM FROM REVOLUTION TO COLD WAR

The development of American nationalism can be di-vided into four stages The first one is lsquoestablishmentrsquo Theterm lsquoAmericanrsquo as a nation started to emerge during themid-18th century due to Benjamin Franklinrsquos Albany PlanIt was a political proposal in 1754 to establish a unionbetween thirteen colonies in East Coast as a response to-ward the threat of French-Indian Warmdashderived from whatwould be Seven Yearsrsquo War in Europe (Gillon amp Matson2002) Despite its failure the plan pioneered the discourseof self-government among colonies prior to American in-dependence Following British Parliamentrsquos series of uni-lateral tax policies the colonists argued that any law en-acted without sufficient representation from constituents(American colonies) within governing body were illegalunder British Bill of Right 1689 Such clash of interestsled to several conflicts between the colonists and British(eg Boston Massacre Gaspee Affairs and Boston TeaParty)

Many exceptional statesmen from thirteen coloniesresponded to the escalating unsolved conflicts with theBritish by establishing Continental Congress in 1774 Itwas designed to rival the British Parliament for their inter-nal affairs (Gillon amp Matson 2002) The Congress laterbecame the founding fathers of the United States ofAmerica (USA) by issuing the Declaration of Independencein 1776 starting the American Revolution against Britishrule for the next seven bloody years Created in 1777 (rati-fied in 1781) the Article of Confederation and PerpetualUnion by the Continental Congress then served as thefirst constitution before being substituted with the USConstitution in 1787 The constitutional change markedthe manifestation of a national (or federal) government Itshould be noted that the establishment of USA along withits constitutions was influenced by Enlightenment think-ing such as John Lockersquos Two Treaties of Government andThomas Painersquos Common Sense which promoted (indi-vidual) freedom against (monarchal) tyranny the right ofself-determination and self-government civil right andconstitutionalism as lsquosocial contractrsquo Dialectically speak-ing US founding fathersrsquo Enlightenment influence com-bined with the urgency from the coloniesrsquo creoles to sepa-

rate from the lsquotyrannicalrsquo British Crown created the veryfirst experiment of civic nationalism which becomes thefoundation of American identity

The second stage which happened around 19th cen-tury is lsquoemergencyrsquo American civic tradition founded byfounding fathers were threatened as the enlargement ofthe US territory to the South and West were accompaniedby the expansion of slavery and several armed conflictswith the Indians The urgency to territorially enlargementwas justified under Manifest Destiny John OrsquoSullivanrsquoslsquotheological claimrsquo from Protestantism that Divine Provi-dence has obligated American to lsquocivilizersquo the savage West(Independence Hall Association 2018) Such a lsquoholy taskrsquohowever was not fully motivated by religious propagandaAfter financial panic in 1837 there was a public thrust tolsquoconquestrsquo West in order to find other market and re-sources This led to the removal of Indian tribes from theirovertaken lands Moreover in order to stabilize agricul-tural production cost and assets the territorial enlargementneeded to be accompanied by several agrarian policieswhich enabled landlords to buy a vast amount of landsand maximize their export-oriented production On theone hand it could be understood as agriculture dominated60-80 of US labor force between 1820-1840 (Gibson ampJung 2005) As a consequence the slaved population(which become the backbone of American antebellumagriculture) grew from one million in the early 19th cen-tury to almost 29 million in the 1840s (Lebergott 1966)

The growth of American slavery constructed the no-tion of white supremacy over black people in which 68of them were slaves Such racism was supported by politi-cal transformation where Jeffersonian democracy (quasi-aristocratic system where the right to vote were based onproperty ownership) changed into Jacksonian democracy(popular democracy universal suffrage for white freemales) It affected the way popular opinion influencedgovernment in addressing racial issues like slavery and theenfranchisement of black people Although US party sys-tem had changed twice since 1824 US Presidential Elec-tion (second- and third-party system which distinctivelyaddressed popular vote and slavery issues) during this stagethe discourse of racial affairs in America had always beendominated by pro-slavery and anti-black enfranchisement


Furthermore such political system and culture had fos-tered the seed of right-wing populism since American po-litical elites could only aggregate popular opinion fromtheir white constituents especially when it related to ra-cial affairs (both slaved and free African-American couldnot vote)

Even though the Civil War (1861-1865) decided north-ern pro-abolition statesrsquo victory and reconstruction policyfor Southern post-Civil War socio-political transformationracism in the US was not faded National history notesthat between 1869-1924 there were around 156 violentcases against non-white people where 111 of them wereaddressed toward African Americans (Olzak amp Shanahan2003) In short the American political system and culturesince the rise of Jacksonian Democracy had dialecticallyprivileged white free male citizens in shaping Americancivic tradition with ethnic (even racial) nationalism

The third stage is lsquomaturityrsquo happened from the early20th century until modern nowadays There were a coupleof factors shaping modern American nationalism The firstone is the immigrants There was an lsquoAge of Mass Migra-tionrsquo where the total amount of immigrant entering USAsignificantly increased from 150000 people in 1860 toapproximately 1250000 people prior to World War I (USCensus Bureau 1949) However the Naturalization Actof 1790 made only whites were eligible for gaining Ameri-can citizenship Although some unusual cases like impor-tation of Chinese labors during Western infrastructureexpansion American post-reconstruction policies andpost-Mexican-American-War naturalization of LatinoAmericans they still received some discriminatory assaultsEven there was some persecution against white Europeanimmigrants whose religion or national descendants weredifferent

Sentiment towards immigrants among US citizensseemed to change into its ambiguous path during the in-terwar period On the one hand America enjoyed whatwould be called lsquoRoaring Twentiesrsquo Such unprecedentedeconomic miracle attracted immigrants from many coun-tries in Southern and Eastern Europe which were devas-tated after World War I Such massive migration rekindledthe widespread of concern that lsquoinferiorrsquo immigrants wouldoverwhelm white Protestant Americans in labor force

religious affairs and socio-political aspects (Gillon ampMatson 2002) For that reason the trend of fundamen-talism nativism and supremacism grew again amongwhite Protestant Americans (eg the revival of Ku KluxKlan) On the other hand during the Great Depressionin the 1930s American economy somehow relied on im-migrants They fulfilled high demand for industrial laborfollowing the New Deal which attracted new labor-intensi-fied investment in both small and mass production manu-factures (Hirschman amp Mogford 2009) They also con-tributed to the growth of American trade abroad and eco-nomic innovation (Dunlevy amp Hutchinson 1999Abramitzky amp Boustan 2017) Not only in the Americaneconomy but they were also meritorious due to their ser-vice within the US Armed Force following military natu-ralization during World War II (US Department of Home-land Security 2018) After the war the US Governmentfinally enacted the Immigration and Nationality Act of1952 which removed racial restrictions for immigrationand naturalization into US citizens

The second factor is lsquonewrsquo liberalism Differing fromEuropean (classical) tradition lsquonewrsquo liberal tradition in theUS is characterized by social liberalism which emphasizesthe combination of basic liberal principles such as civicliberty and equality with support for socialist principleslike social welfare and justice and mixed economy (Adams2001) American people who follow this paradigm are calledlsquoliberalsrsquo while people who still hold classical liberalism(by European standards) along with republicanism andJudeo-Christian valuesmdashlike US founding fathersrsquo systemof beliefsmdashare called lsquoconservativesrsquo The development oflsquonewrsquo liberalism can be traced back to Progressive Era (1890-1920) The progressive movement aimed to eliminate prob-lems caused by industrialization urbanization immigra-tion and corruption in government (Buenker Burnhamamp Crunden 1986)mdashmarking the fourth party system No-table advocates included a couple of US Presidents suchas Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson Their po-litical philosophies and policies included extensive gov-ernmental intervention in public affairs and usually ad-dressing social economic issues (eg the campaign of lsquoNewNationalismrsquo and lsquoNew Freedomrsquo in 1912) The manifesta-tion of lsquonewrsquo liberalism was also strengthened by the fifth

195

party system or lsquoNew Deal Party Systemrsquo Following theGreat Depression in 1930s Franklin Delano Rooseveltrsquosadministration with a grand bipartisan coalition enforcedenormous power to intervene in real economy healing fromdepression Bottom line it can be inferred in a dialecticalway that immigrants and lsquonewrsquo liberalism brought by pro-gressive elites had matched with American multiculturalsociety in reinventing American civic nationalism withmodified modern liberal values

The fourth stage is lsquoexpansionrsquo Following devastatedEurope after World War II the US became the new globalpower only to be challenged by the Soviet Union Thisshaped bipolarity of global politics into the Cold War Inorder to prevent the spreading influence of communismthe US and its allies from North America Western Eu-rope Australia and Japan began to adopt what was calledTruman Doctrinemdashgeopolitical containment through proxyconflict if necessarymdashand Marshall Planmdasheconomic devel-opment aids for allies will be explained in the later part(Cincotta et al 2011) Due to this doctrine Southeast AsiaKorea Afghanistan the Middle East and also Cuba be-came a battlefield for these two great powers and theirrespective allies (Gillon amp Matson 2002) Simultaneouslyit marked the end of Monroe Doctrine (American isola-tionism) and the rise of American proliferation of liberaland democratic values through both economic and mili-tary-security alliancemdashthe precedence of NATO (Nau2017)

This stage was also marked by a change in US domesticpolitical system which became more pluralist Politicalpowers in the domestic realm from the 1950s were frag-mented into several units who contested to become policyinfluencermdashbased on the democratic principle of lsquofreedomof associationrsquo Robert Dahl (1971) described this aslsquopolyarchyrsquo The main point is that popular democracy inthe US had slowly decreased and reshaped into a kind ofsimilar structure like Jeffersonian quasi-aristocrat but withdifferent basis (eg limited interest groups who could lobbygovernment) In this system entrepreneurs and industri-alists were parts of dominant business interest group seek-ing influence toward decision-making process favoringthem mainly for business expansion (further informationwill be detailed in the later section) Combined with Ameri-

can multiculturalism politics of identity once again cameto prominent issues during the 1960s and 1970s due tothe right deficit for people of colorsmdashAfrican-AmericanLatino-American and Native Indians The issues includedcivil inequality racial segregation discriminatoryoverexploitation within workplaces racial inequality inpolitical participation gender inequality and other socio-economic rights

It finally needed at least a series of progressive policies(New Frontier and Great Society) three new laws (CivilRights Act of 1964 Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Equal-ity Rights Amendment of 1972) several civilian conflictsand some deaths of national leaders such as John FKennedy Robert F Kennedy Martin Luther King JrMalcolm X etc to make American multicultural societybecome qualitatively expansive and more tolerant Suchbloody successes along with the threat of communismduring Cold War and political economic thrust from do-mestic business to expand their production and investmentinspired American foreign policy to promote liberal de-mocracy as a lsquomoral coverrsquo for their military campaign post-war era Therefore in the Cold War context the rise ofAmerican multinational corporations in global productionand financial structure and domestic experience aboutcivil right movements had made American multiculturalsociety dialectically correlate with American pluralist-demo-cratic system in which American nationalism incarnatedinto something internationalist and expansive This stagein the future will inspire both hawkish (usually conserva-tivesmodern Republican) and dovish (usually liberalmodern Democrats) stronghold in shaping American poli-tics

The summarized historical construction of Americannationalism according to Jonathan Monten (2005) hasalways been a matter of strengthening and promoting lib-eral values (including democracy) domestically and abroadThrough all stages American civic nationalism has tech-nically matured in domestic level so they can expand theirideals abroad Contextualized with external affairs bothUS domestic policies and even foreign policies are deter-mined by such mission Through such lsquoperformative dis-tinctionrsquo it helps American in defining distinctive iden-tity among nations


UNITED STATES ECONOMIC TRADITION lsquoSTRATEGICECONOMICSrsquo

There are two foundational arguments in describingthe whole history of the US economy These followingarguments are interconnected to the way US governmentconduct their strategy in favor of economic developmentand growth The first one related to international eco-nomic relation is that the US government have been pur-sued what is called as lsquostrategic economicsrsquo Michael Lind(2003) and Ha-Joon Chang (2002) argued that those de-veloped countries in this era like the US did not followeconomic prescription from classical economist such asAdam Smith or David Ricardo which emphasized the lsquoin-visible handrsquo Instead they were pursuing economic na-tionalism which is characterized mainly by protectionisttrade policies and additional intervention from the gov-ernment They added that protectionism was the US defacto trade policy between 1816 to the end of World WarII US average tariffs and duties for imported goods be-tween 1820-1945 was about 3537 in which Tariff ofAbomination in 1828 and Smoot-Hawley Tariff duringGreat Depression in the 1930s reached respectively 65and 575mdashsee Figure 2 (US Census Bureau 1975 USInternational Trade Commission 2010) Despite the starkfluctuation US still became one of the countries with thehighest tariffsduties rate in the world at that time

Due to the rise of American industrialism between 1840to 1900 employment in agricultural sector decreased sig-

nificantly from 68 to 40 of US total labor forces whenindustry and services growth exponentially respective from12 and 20 to 26 and 33 Simultaneously US agri-cultural output decreased from 47 to 20 where indus-try and services output respectively growth from 21 and31 to 40 and 39 of average price pegged to 1860(Mokyr 2018) The significance of industrialism towardUS economy represented a series of economic policies is-sued by the US government which prioritized industrialinterest over agrarian one The industrialist class was infavor of policies which fostered and protected infant in-dustries from foreign competition Through tariffs andduties US government historically imposed some protec-tionist regulations such as the Dingley Tariff of 1897 Payne-Aldrich Tariff of 1909 Underwood Tariff of 1913 Fordneyand McCumber Tariff of 1922 and Smoot-Hawley Tariffof 1930

Once US industries reached the stage of maturity plusthe decline of British economic hegemony and devastatedEuropean economies during two World Wars (Strange2015) industrialists chose to expand their market abroadand become the new global economic power Using jar-gons such as free and fair trade they instructed many coun-tries both developed and developing ones to open theirmarket and adjust their political-economic structure as whatthe US perceived The US with other Western countriesinfluenced international financial structure through aninternational organization such as International Monetary

Figure 2 Percentage of US Average TariffsDuties Imposed to Imported Goods

Source US Census Bureau amp US International Trade Commission

197

Fund (IMF) World Bank and WTO and internationalproduction structure through the expansion of their mul-tinational companies throughout the world

The second argument which related to the domesticpublic-private economic relations is that US economy rep-resented political contestation between pro-laissez-faire elitesand interventionist elites This tension firstly appeared asthe US became a newly independent state AlexanderHamilton first US secretary of treasury ever and a federal-ist partisan urged interventionist policies by subsidizinginfant industries establishing a national central bank andprotectionist tariffs for imported goods He believed asmany industrialists did that as a new economic sectorduring that age industry notably manufactures transpor-tation and banking services need to be fostered by thegovernment into the stage of expansive maturity (Conte etal 1981) Thomas Jefferson on the other hand opposedhim by looking for democratic agrarian decentralizationin order to protect farmers He believed that farmers areAmerican lsquopreciousrsquo citizens whose economic liberties needto be protected from political economic tyranny (Conte etal 1981) The debate reflected the US between the late18th and 19th century when their development policieschanged from agriculture-based economy to industry-basedone

At the nationalism stage of lsquoestablishmentrsquo and lsquoemer-gencyrsquo laissez-faire stance dominated the US politicaleconomy Both fellow Jeffersonian and Jacksonian Ameri-can supported non-intervention economic governancethrough a financial and fiscal system despite their differ-ence between the formerrsquos agrarian democracy and thelatterrsquos tendency toward very-slow industrialization Forexample Andrew Jackson during his presidency discon-tinued Hamiltonian national bankmdashsomething that hispredecessor could not do He believed that Hamiltoniannational bank would serve only industrialistsrsquo interest ratherthan agrariansrsquo interest (Conte et al 1981) Aside fromlowering import tariffs down he also opposed any bot-tom-up development project which involved federal fund-ing such as the veto of the Maysville Road project whichconnected several states (Shmoop 2018) The raison drsquoetrebehind those policies was that he had personally hateddebt since his day one as a land speculator in Tennessee

(Smith 2011) From his point of view he did not want hispresidency was fulfilled by debt from banking institutionsso he decided to pay all national debt offmdashthe only timewhen the US was free from any debt

During nationalism stage of lsquomaturityrsquo as the result ofthe reconstruction era the US economy was about to bedirected toward industrialization Federal government in-tervention was needed to regulate the path Several newinstitutions were established between 1890-1945 such asthe Interstate Commerce Commission Food and DrugAdministration and the Federal Trade Commission(Conte et al 1981) Under the New Deal governmentintervention extended enacted in order to relieve for theunemployed poor recover the economy and reform thefinancial system to prevent similar another Great Depres-sion New laws also accompanied more institutions estab-lishment like Civilian Conservation Corps the Civil WorksAdministration the Farm Security Administration andthe Social Security Administration (eg National Indus-trial Recovery Act and Banking Act of 1933 Wagner ActSocial Security Act Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 andAgricultural Adjustment Act of 1933) During World WarII greater government intervention toward the US mar-ket directed all production and financial capacities to wagearmed forces in both Pacific and European frontier esca-lating economic output tremendously It was the only pe-riod in US history when they reached its highest form ofHamiltonian dream

Entering nationalism stage of lsquoexpansionrsquo US economyespecially its industries had matured and ready to com-pete globally American entrepreneurs industrialists andfinanciers who benefited from the involvement of the USin World War II making profitable excuses to producemore goods and services and lend some credits for foreigneconomies The need for economic recovery in post-warEurope in the context of communism prevention also gavesufficient space for the American economy to expand Italso marked the radical change of production structure inUS industry (from small mass production to globalizationof production network) making US cheaper productsoutflew toward the global market along with their foreigndirect investments (FDI) Such economic expansion gotits peak momentum during the 1970s and 1980s Follow-


ing the end of Fordism and Oil Crisis in 1973 many USenterprises consider outsourcing their production aboardAccording to Charles-Albert Michalet (1976) they imple-mented lsquoworkshop affiliatesrsquo which dispersed productionsystem into smaller units and spread them to many regionswith cost-and-benefit consideration It made their produc-tion output larger and cheaper which attracted more con-sumers Immediately they dominate the global market inwhich other multinational corporations from other coun-tries in Europe and East Asia would soon follow

It can be inferred that the development of Americannationalismmdashfrom lsquoestablishmentrsquo to lsquoexpansionrsquomdashcorre-lates with the US economic maturity in the process Pull-ing out interests between political and business elites withinUS political-economic governance combined with exter-nal dynamics has made federal government implementinglsquostrategic economicsrsquo in the sense of what Lind and Changhave told us Nationalism has caused the US to act prag-matically toward the dynamics of the global economyWhen they transited from agrarian country toward indus-trialized (and also services) nation they need political-eco-nomic governance which guarantees peaceful socio-eco-nomic and socio-political disruption In this case US gov-ernment had preserved stability through forceful mea-suresmdashfrom domestic tax international duties some es-tablishments and even military campaignmdashto make pre-occupied changes in global production financial and evenknowledge structure benefits them It is when the US hasrealized that they become the holder of structural powerin world political economy they change the path by openlyagreeing globalization of world economy in which theychoke it to other countries It eventually makes sense ofUS economic nationalism at the very definitive basis pre-viously

DONALD TRUMPrsquoS PRESIDENCY A THREAT TOWARDAMERICAN CIVIC NATIONALIST TRADITION

Bart Bonikowski and Paul DiMaggio (2016) explainedvarieties of American nationalism prior to the beginningof Donald Trumprsquos presidency They revealed that 24 ofrespondents perceived their identity as American as lsquoar-dentrsquo characterized by strong feeling on US citizenshipdeep devotion on US institution and law urging to be

living in America for at least a year and embracing Protes-tant ethic Furthermore 38 of respondents have evenrestrictive perception about American identity which is theescalated characteristic of the previous type of national-ism which is added by a strong pride of Americanexceptionalism These strong senses of American nation-alism represented middle-low income middle-low edu-cated mid-life and white Midwestern and Southern popu-lation Bonikowski and DiMaggio argued that ethnocul-tural sentiment has risen to prominence since they thoughtthat American Dreammdashwhich the ideal that every US citi-zen should have an equal opportunity to achieve successand prosperity through hard work determination andinitiativemdashhas not been realized It contradicts other twominor varieties of American nationalismmdashthe lsquodisengagedrsquoand creedal nationalismmdashwhich believe that they success-fully achieved the American Dream These sentiments aremotivated by multicultural youth who dominantly settlein both East and West Coast

Their description on varieties of American national-ism nearly represents Trumprsquos constituents According toCNN Exit Polls for 2016 US presidential election (2016)his supporters dominantly comprises middle-low educatedreligious white protestantsmdashregardless of their gendersmdashwho live in Mid-west and South The difference betweenreferences is that Trumprsquos constituents consist of middle-high income population instead of the opposite YetTrumprsquos campaign addressed his inconvenience about USpolitics by blaming lsquoestablished yet corruptedrsquo political andbusiness elites who hold power as sources of US claimeddecline He juxtaposed himself with them as a sign of hisdefiance from such elites before changing his claim in hislater campaign that he stood for the people (Friedman2018)

His rhetoric flows however are intriguing First theword lsquodemocracyrsquo itself consists of two Greek words demosas lsquo(common) peoplersquo or lsquomobrsquomdashaccording to Platorsquos pointof view lsquoignorant onesrsquomdashand kratos which means lsquoto rulersquo(Crick 2002) Trump hijacked democracy by mobilizinghis lsquoignorantrsquo supporters for his political gain By raisingnationalistic issues such as undocumented immigrantswhich cause US recent high crime rate Islamic terrorismon national security military and security blunders and

199

economic globalization Trump wanted to bind and ex-pand his grassroots supporters with shared conservatismSecond continuing from the previous point Trumprsquos cam-paign framed with catchy slogans such as lsquoMake AmericaGreat Againrsquo and lsquoAmerica Firstrsquo is very critical Agreeingwith Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tverskyrsquos ProspectTheory he made many of his supporters into believingthat the state of the union was abyssal and many peoplehave lost something into uncertainty and volatility (egglobal economic crisis and Islamic terrorism) At this mo-ment his demagogue encouraged American people to berisk-takers by preferring withdrawal from the old socio-political and economic establishment and choosing himwith the promise to make America great again (Kanev2017)

Third the incompatibility of what President Trumphas said and the available facts is surpising According toAdam Curtis (2016) Trump in his campaign asserted manyfacts which were untrue and bore little relationship withreality For example when President Trump highlightedhigh-rated crime in which he claimed committed by un-documented immigrants Cato Institute and the MarshallProject researched that 153 of native-born Americansare incarcerated compared with 085 of undocumentedimmigrants and 047 of legal immigrant despite increas-ing immigrant population (Rogers 2018) FurthermoreThe Washington Post fact-checker column awarded Presi-dent Trump with lsquofour Pinocchiosrsquomdashthe lowest rank forhonestymdashwith 63 out of all his statesmen compared withother presidential candidates (Farhi 2016) Surprisinglymany people bought his demagogue and voted for him inthe ballot Fourth as a consequence his populism wasnot as tremendous as it was expected Trump only secured461 of popular vote losing to Hillary Clinton who won482 of popular vote However Trumprsquos voter turnoutwas sufficiently decisive to be converted into an electoralcollege in strategic states in Midwest and Southmdashmany ofhis core supportermdashbringing him to the White House

Recalling dialectics of nationalism we can infer thatpolitical elites like Donald Trump had mobilized whiteconservatives to support him in achieving his presidencyHe shaped and directed the US political atmosphere infavor of his political gain by throwing populist-nationalist

discourse in many of his signature issues such as immigra-tion national security Islamic terrorism and internationaltrade The way Trump introduces American populist-na-tionalism during his political reign resembles the stagelsquoemergencyrsquo of American nationalism during the rise ofpopulist President Andrew Jackson and later Jacksoniandemocratic tradition It can potentially deconstruct Ameri-can civic nationalism with liberal tradition The reason isthat President Trumprsquos nationalist performativity has trig-gered the decline of creedal nationalism and bring ardent(even restrictive) one into the discourse American iden-tity is about to be restored to exclusive nativist and evenviolent features with nationalism stage of lsquoemergencyrsquo Fed-eral Bureau of Investigation (FBI) showed that race-basedhate crimes increased the day after the 2016 Trumprsquos elec-toral victory (Williams amp Hauslohner 2018) MoreoverKarsten Muller and Carlo Schwarz (2018) revealed thestrong correlation between accounts with high numbersof followers (such as President Trump) tweeting hate speechand racist remarks and follow-up violence and hatred inpublic and even in private settingsmdashsince the beginning ofTrumprsquos campaign in mid-2015 Not to mention that bothTrumprsquos campaign and presidency are piggybacked by therising alt-right movements with shared xenophobic inter-est It can be considered as a betrayal of Americanexceptionalism

NATIONALIST MOTIVATION OF DONALD TRUMPrsquoS TRADEPOLICY

Given socio-political and demo-economic explanationduring his campaign and presidency it can be assured thatPresident Trump is tied with his political supporters whogive him both framed policies constituent base and its ef-fect on policies rationalization First of all recalling DonaldTrumprsquos constituents which comprise dominantly Midwest-ern and Southern middle-low educated religious andwhite Protestants with a restrictive sense of American na-tionalism they are divided into primary and secondaryones The primary constituents who convincingly influ-ence Trumprsquos policy-making come from businesspeopleand industrialists Similarly Nicholas Carnes and NoamLupu (2017) said that Trump voters were political-economi-cally affluent people Even though they barely have a col-


lege education it does not guarantee their status as work-ing-class automatically

Specifically businesspeople and industrialists who be-came Trumprsquos voters were coincidentally focused on eco-nomic sectors which become Trumprsquos main concernsmdashmanufactures heavy machines electronics automotiveand even extractives Such big names included CharlesKoch (Koch Industries) US Secretary of Commerce WilburRoss (Manufacture Groups) Darwin Deason (ACS andXerox) and Carl Icahn (Icahn Enterprise and Federal-Mogul) (Hackett 2016) President Trump also secured vot-ers from Rust Belt states (New York Pennsylvania WestVirginia Ohio Indiana Michigan Illinois Iowa Wiscon-sinmdashregions whose industries have declined since 1973 OilCrisis) He promised to revive traditional industries to sup-port his lsquoBring Back American Jobrsquo campaign (McClelland2016) Those billionaires and states were tied with theirenormous laborsworkersmdashsecondary constituents ingrassroots levelmdashwhose incomes were relatively middle-lowElites mobilized them to support Trump in return for va-cancies in the US job market Put together into massivepolitical constituents for Trump they narrowed their po-litical-economic interests into the urgency of revivingAmerican manufacture industries which will increase do-mestic production and create more job opportunities Inthis case they are going to need federal government inter-vention to issue policies which will both attract multina-tional offshored industries back to the country and de-crease imports through protectionist measures

Political economic aspiration from his constituents withgiven socio-political background shaped President Trumprsquostrade policy rationalization Consistent with Ka Zengrsquosargument (2004) President Trump saw US trade struc-ture with trading partners They believed that if a countryrsquostrade structure with partners is competitive they are proneto be aggressive regarding their national trade interest andthus protect their national market through several protec-tionist policies and vice versa Let us take a look at somecommodities which President Trump is most concernedThe first one is photovoltaic solar power (solar panel) TheQuote Company (2018) recorded significant decrease ofsolar panel price from USD 1015 per watt in 1975 to only61 cents per watt in 2015 while there is significant growth

of global solar panel installation from 2 to 64892 Mega-watt at the same period China has become the most sig-nificant contributor toward such stark change since itsbooming production during the last decade which domi-nated 304 of global production (IEA 2016) From thisperspective US-China trade relations in solar panel in-dustries become competitive in which China is a winningside Second the US government also problematized worldwashing machine industries Euromonitor shows that theUS government considered 12 million units of importedwashing machines would threaten American washing ma-chine industries which grow from 75 million units to 9million units between 2014-2017 (Bloomberg 2018) Thisassumption is based on US washing machine trade deficitwith the world where its exportation from that 9 millionunits does not reach half of its importation It triggeredUSITC to impose tariff 40-50 on both imported photo-voltaic solar power and washing machine to the US mar-ket (US International Trade Commission 2017)

Third US steel industries President Trumprsquos mainagenda during his campaign and presidency were also con-sidered to be threatened by foreign steels According tothe World Steel Association (2018) world steel produc-tion grew from 135 million tons in 2007 to 169 milliontons in 2017 in which once again China dominated with492 of it However its demand prospect is predicted todecelerate approximately 16-18 More than the decel-eration of global economic growth which infected ChinaIndia and the US themselves a growing trend to reducereuse and recycle secondhand and scrapped steelssustainably also affects a decreasing demand for world freshsteel (Maytaal 2017) As a result world steel oversupplyoccurred and decreases the price According to WilburRoss US Secretary of Commerce it would have burdenedUS steel industries since domestic production cost is rela-tively high Once again China is behind the scene

The same condition also applied to US aluminum in-dustries The US aluminum production between 1996-2017decreased from 36 million metric tons to 09 millionmetric tons while at the same time its importation grewfrom 2 million metric tons toward 55 million metric tonsSuch gap between huge imports and fewer productionmade average productivity-to-capacity ratio in January 2017

201

only reaches 48 relatively low than China (77) Rus-sia (85) India (71) Canada (99) and United ArabEmirates (100) (US Department of Commerce 2018)US low rate of productivity-to-capacity ratio adjusted do-mestic production cost which will affect the unemploy-ment of aluminum labors Whereas both steel and alumi-num industries become the backbone of US industriesrevitalization and such impotence is miserable for botheconomic growth and job opportunities That is the mainreason behind Trumprsquos tariffs on imported steel and alu-minum which reach respectively 10 and 25

Aside from trade structure in commodities PresidentTrump delivered his concern regarding Chinese govern-ment policies which require a technological transfer inreturn for investment in the mainland RepresentingUSTR Robert E Lighthizer investigated threatening Chi-nese technological transfer intellectual property and in-novation policies It can be understood that such policiescan make China upgrading their commoditiesrsquo quality upto the same level of US enterprises instantly Such prac-tices can be considered as unfair as US companiesrsquo sellingrate income and profit rate business opportunities andglobal added value chain will be negatively affected (USTrade Representative 2018) It can be inferred that suchcomprehensive data and analysis above confirm DonaldTrumprsquos argument of trade structure in which he referredto it as lsquounfairrsquo and lsquocompetitiversquo It gives nothing but ajustification regarding his tariffs and quotas policies in anationalist sensemdashto protect domestic industries and jobsmdashresulting in aggressive trade wars internationally Suchperspective shut the Chinese Embassy for the US whoseclaim about US-China trade relation is a state of absolutegains if not complementary one many years ago (Shan2010)

In addition to the urgency of providing new job oppor-tunities for American by reviving national industries andprevent threatening imported goods President Trump alsochose to use a harsh approach to immigration policy Hewanted to limit as much as possible immigrant workerseither highly-skilled or less highly-skilled ones indiscrimi-nately As such he targeted around 26370 personnel unitswould be steady for US border patrol in 2017 25 higherthan previous year (Kamarck Hudak amp Stenglein 2017)

Availability of future job vacancies for (native) Americansbecomes the primary purpose This policy just like hisapproach on trade structure and intellectual properties isbased on nationalist motivation who seeks for nation-basedrelative gains in international economic affairs so to beredistributed domesticallymdashprivileges for a member of anationcountry However according to Harry J Holzer(2018) indiscriminative of immigration limitation policywill negatively affect the US labor market The reason isthat the labor market will have deficit labor forces whichlevel up wage rate High wage rate will force market mecha-nism to raise the price in goods which the public wouldconsume resulting in the decrease of real income laborswould get home That could be a negative political eco-nomic backlash for Trumprsquos presidency

Therefore the economic and trade policies patternshowed by Donald Trumprsquos presidency above became simi-lar to his populist-nationalist political aspirations It gotclear that Trump must be attached with his populist con-stituent including their economic interests to preservehis political support in present and future What made itrelatively unique is that Trump on the other side also uti-lizes his supportersrsquo background and their perception aboutnational identity and its consequential pride and hubriswhich shape their interest in economic and trading affairsespecially in international level to smooth his campaignto the presidency In effect of American nationalism stageson national economic behavior what President Trump hasdone with the US political economic governance becamecoherent with its pragmatism toward global political eco-nomic dynamicsmdashprotectionist policies in return ofreindustrialization and so-called job protection withouttotal withdrawal from it However in the context of elite-society dialectics of nationalism President Trump some-how only resembled lsquoemergencyrsquo stage of American na-tionalism with Jacksonian populism Still the historicityof Trumprsquos populist-nationalism and its protectionist tradepolicy is coherently relevant

CONCLUSIONFrom the perspective of economic nationalism this

article concludes that Donald Trumprsquos protectionist tradepolicy (tariffs and quotas) can be considered as an attempt


to not only protect national economic interest but also tosecure his political power before his constituents and theirnational postulation As most of his constituentsmdashreligiousmiddle-high income middle-low educated white South-ern and Midwestern Protestantsmdashbenefit from governmentpolicies which addressed job opportunities for Americansand reindustrialization (especially of manufactures in pre-viously agglomerated industrial areas) President Trumpchose to uplift the issue of trade and industries to the policydiscourse Having been framed under his nationalisticnarratives since his campaign to the White House in mid-2015 until his current presidency (eg lsquoMake AmericaGreat Againrsquo and lsquoAmerica Firstrsquo) President Trumprsquos pro-tectionist trade policies attack the so-called unfree unfairinternational trade structure due to the lsquomenacersquo of for-eign commodities (and even labors) Historically speakingsuch political-economic manifestation is justified by theconstruction of American nationalism Through Hegeliandialectics of nationalism it can be understood that powerrelations between American political elitessystem with itscitizens embraced American civic tradition whose prag-matism toward the dynamics of the global politicaleconomy is inherent Despite different political economiccontext with agriculture-based Andrew Jacksonrsquos presidencycenturies ago it should be noted that Trumprsquos presidencyshares similar logic of economic nationalism and itsgovernmentality with Jacksonian democracy thus shapedthe way President Trump saw lsquofreersquo and lsquofairnessrsquo in inter-national trade and US position within it

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTThis research was supported by Institute of Interna-

tional Studies (IIS) Universitas Gadjah Mada who facili-tated monthly discussion Menggelorakan Perang DagangKebijakan Proteksionisme Trump dalam Perspektif NasionalismeEkonomi (Hotting-up the Trade War Trumprsquos Protection-ism Policy in the Perspective of Economic Nationalism)on July 26th 2018 With the help of Dr Riza Noer ArfaniDirector of IIS the discussion has really helped the au-thor in sharpening required data and substantial analysisfor this article and have also given many insights and ex-pertise during the mentioned discussion

REFERENCESAbramitzky R amp Boustan L (2017) Immigration in American

Economic History Journal of Economic Literature 55(4) pp1311-1345

Adams I (2001) Political Ideology Today Manchester ManchesterUniversity Press

Anderson B (2006) Imagined Community London VersoBibliography Bloomberg (2018 January 23) How Asian Giants Can

Counter Trumprsquos Washing Machine Tariff Bloomberg Retrieved15 October 2018 from httpswwwbloombergcomnewsarticles2018-01-23how-asian-giants-can-counter-trump-s-washing-machine-levy

Bonikowski B amp DiMaggio P (2016) Varieties of AmericanPopular Nationalism American Sociological Review 81(5) pp949-980

Bown C P (2018 March 9) Europe is Pushing Back AgainstTrumprsquos Steel and Aluminum Tariffs Herersquos how The Washing-ton Post Retrieved 21 July 2018 from httpswwwwashingtonpostcomnewsmonkey-cagewp20180309europe-is-pushing-back-against-trumps-steel-and-aluminum-tariffs-heres-howutm_term=6dbe8cce8c40

Bown C P amp Kolb M (2018 July 5) Is Trump in a Trade War AnUp-to-Date Guide Peterson Institute for International Econom-ics Retrieved 10 July 2018 from httpspiiecomblogstrade-investment-policy-watchtrump-trade-war-china-date-guide

Buenker J D Burnham J C amp Crunden R M (1986) Progressiv-ism Cambridge MA Schenkman Publication Company

Canadian Department of Finance (2018 June 29) Countermea-sures in Response to Unjustified Tariffs on Canadian Steel andAluminum Products Department of Finance Canada Retrieved21 July 2018 from httpswwwfingccaaccesstt-itcacsap-cmpcaa-1-engasp

Carnes N amp Lupu N (2017 June 5) Itrsquos Time to Bust the MythMost Trump Voters Were Not Working Class The WashingtonPost Retrieved 14 October 2018 from httpswwwwashingtonpostcomnewsmonkey-cagewp20170605its-time-to-bust-the-myth-most-trump-voters-were-not-working-classnoredirect=onamputm_term=15f65f060302

CEIC (2018) Indicators Gross National Product CEIC Retrieved 13October 2018 from httpswwwceicdatacomenindicators

Chang H J (2002) Kicking Away the Ladder DevelopmentStrategy in Historical Perspective London Anthem Press

Chu B (2017 February 24) What is Steve Bannonrsquos lsquoEconomicNationalismrsquo And Should We be Scared The IndependentRetrieved 10 July 2018 from httpswwwindependentcouknewsbusinessnewssteve-bannon-economic-nationalism-what-is-it-explained-donald-trump-cpac-2017-a7598181html

Cincotta H Brown D M Burant S Green M Holden J S ampMarshall R (2011) Garis Besar Sejarah AS Washington DCUS Department of State

CNN (2016 November 23) Election 2016 Exit Polls CNN PoliticsRetrieved 20 July 2018 from httpseditioncnncomelection2016resultsexit-polls

Conte C Karr A Clark G Hug K E amp Manning L (1981)Garis Besar Ekonomi Amerika Serikat Washington DC Officeof International Information Programs United States Depart-

203

ment of StatesCrick B (2002) Democracy A Very Short Introduction Oxford

Oxford University PressCurtis A (Director) (2016) HyperNormalisation [Motion Picture]Curtis A (Sutradara) (2016) HyperNormalisation [Gambar Hidup]Dahl R A (1971) Polyarchy Participation and Opposition New

Haven Yale University PressDoyle M W (1983) Kant Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs

Part 2 Philosophy amp Public Affairs 12(4) pp 323-353Doyle M W (1983) Kant Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs

Philosophy amp Public Affairs 12(3) pp 205-235Dunlevy J A amp Hutchinson W K (1999) The Impact of Immigra-

tion on American Import Trade in the Late Nineteenth and EarlyTwentieth Centuries Journal of Economic History 59(4) pp1043-1062

Farhi P (2016 February 26) Think Trumprsquos Wrong Fact CheckersCan Tell You How Often (Hint A lot) The Washington PostRetrieved 2 October 2018 from httpswwwwashingtonpostcomlifestylestylethe-existential-crisis-of-professional-factcheckers-in-the-year-of-trump20160225e994f210-db3e-11e5-81ae-7491b9b9e7df_storyhtmlnoredirect=onamputm_term=44da35ddb617

Friedman U (2018 February) What Is Populist The AtlanticRetrieved 1 October 2018 from httpswwwtheatlanticcominternationalarchive201702what-is-populist-trump516525

Gellner E (1983) Nations and Nationalism Ithaca NY CornellUniversity Press

Gibson C amp Jung K (2005) Historical Census Statistics onPopulation Totals by Race 1790 to 1990 and by HispanicOrigin 1970 to 1990 for Large Cities and Other Urban Placesin the United States Washington D C US Census Bureau

Gillon S M amp Matson C D (2002) The American Experiment aHistory of the United States Boston Houghton MifflinCompany

Hackett R (2016 August 3) Here Are All the Billionaires BackingDonald Trump Fortune Retrieved 15 October 2018 fromhttpfortunecom20160803trump-billionaire-backers-list

Hirschman C amp Mogford E (2009) Immigration and theAmerican Industrial Revolution from 1880 to 1920 SocialScience Research 38(4) pp 897-920

Holzer H J (2018 January 17) One Year in Has Trump beenGood for US Workers Brookings Retrieved 14 October 2018from httpswwwbrookingseduopinionsone-year-in-has-trump-been-good-for-us-workers

IEA (2016) 2015 Snapshot of Global Photovoltaic Markets ParisInternational Energy Association

IIS UGM (2018 2018 August) Negara dan Pasar IPEDia(Instagram Post) Retrieved from httpsinstagramcompBmTCU4pg6A8

Independence Hall Association (2018) 29 Manifest Destiny USHistory Retrieved from httpwwwushistoryorgus29asp

Kamarck E Hudak J amp Stenglein C (2017 August 15)Immigration by the Numbers Brookings Retrieved 16 October2018 from httpswwwbrookingseduinteractivesimmigra-tion-by-the-numberskeyword=immigrants

Kanev D (2017) Why Trump Won the Election - In View of the

Prospect Theory Economic Archive LXX(3) pp 27-39Lebergott S (1966) Labor Force and Employment 1800ndash1960 In

D S Brady Output Employment and Productivity in theUnited States after 1800 (pp 117-204) Cambridge MA TheNational Bureau of Economic Research

Lind M (2003 January 20) Free Trade Fallacy Prospect Retrieved18 July 2018 from httpsprospectmagazinecoukmagazinefreetradefallacy

Lu Z amp Schott J J (2018 April 9) How Is China Retaliating for USNational Security Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum PetersonInstitute for International Economics Retrieved 21 July 2018from httpspiiecomresearchpiie-chartshow-china-retaliat-ing-us-national-security-tariffs-steel-and-aluminum

Maytaal A (2017 October 16) Global Steel Demand Growth toSlow in 2018 Worldsteel Says Reuters Retrieved 21 July 2018from httpswwwreuterscomarticleus-steel-demand-globalglobal-steel-demand-growth-to-slow-in-2018-worldsteel-says-idUSKBN1CL0Q8

McClelland E (2016 September 23) Why Trump Wonrsquot Save theRust Belt The New York Times Retrieved 14 October 2018from httpwwwnytimescom20160923opinioncampaign-stopswhy-trump-wont-save-the-rust-belthtml

Michalet C A (1976) Le Capitalisme Mondiale Paris PressUniversitaires de France

Ministry of Commerce of P R China (2018 April 4) Announce-ment on the Imposition of Tariffs on Some Imported GoodsOriginating in the United States The State Council InformationOffice of the Peoplersquos Republic of China Retrieved 21 July2018 from httpwwwsciogovcnxwfbhxwbfbhwqfbh3760138181xgzc38187Document16268391626839htm

Mokyr J (2018) Economics 323-2 Economic History of the UnitedStates Since 1865 Joel Mokyr Department of Economics(Northwestern University) Retrieved 10 October 2018 fromhttpfacultywcasnorthwesternedu~jmokyrGraphs-and-TablesPDF

Monten J (2005) The Roots of the Bush Doctrine PowerNationalism and Democracy Promotion in US StrategyInternational Security 29(4) pp 112-156

Muller K amp Schwarz C (2018 March 28) Making America HateAgain Twitter and Hate Crime Under Trump Social ScienceResearch Network Retrieved 3 October 2018 from httpspapersssrncomsol3paperscfmabstract_id=3149103

Nakano T (2004) Hegelrsquos Theory of Economic NationalismPolitical Economy in the Philosophy of Right The EuropeanJournal of the History of Economic Thought 11(1) pp 33-52

Nau H N (2017 January 6) Americarsquos International NationalismThe American Interest Retrieved 11 October 2018 from httpswwwthe-american-interestcom20170106americas-international-nationalism

Olzak S amp Shanahan S (2003) Racial Policy and Racial Conflict inthe Urban United States 1869-1924 Social Forces 82(2) pp481-517

Polimpung H Y (2014) Asal Usul Kedaulatan TelaahPsikogenealogis atas Hasrat Mikrofasis Bernegara DepokPenerbit Kepik

Rogers K (2018 June 22) Trump Highlights Immigrant Crime to


Defend His Border Policy Statistics Donrsquot Back Him Up TheNew York Times Retrieved 2 October 2018 from httpswwwnytimescom20180622uspoliticstrump-immigration-borders-family-separationhtml

Schwartz I (2017 February 27) Trump I Am A Nationalist in ATrue Sense Real Clear Politics Retrieved 5 July 2018 fromhttpswwwrealclearpoliticscomvideo20170227trump_i_am_a_nationalist_in_a_true_sensehtml

Shan Z (2010 March 26) US-China Trade Is Win-Win GameEmbassy of the Peoplersquos Republic of China in the United Statesof America Retrieved 22 July 2018 from httpwwwchina-embassyorgengxwt675646htm

Shmoop (2018) Economy in The Jackson Era Shmoop Retrieved11 October 2018 from httpswwwshmoopcomjackson-eraeconomyhtml

Smith R (2011 April 15) When The US Paid Off The EntireNational Debt (And Why It Didnrsquot Last) Planet MoneyRetrieved 11 October 2018 from httpswwwnprorgsectionsmoney20110415135423586when-the-u-s-paid-off-the-entire-national-debt-and-why-it-didnt-last

Strange S (2015) State and Market (Cetak Ulang ed) LondonBloomsbury

Swanson A amp Tankersley J (2018 June 5) Mexico Hitting BackImposes Tariffs on $3 Billion Worth of US Goods The NewYork Times Retrieved 18 July 2018 from httpswwwnytimescom20180605uspoliticstrump-trade-canada-mexico-naftahtml

The Quote Company (2018) Solar Panel Prices The QuoteCompany Retrieved 23 July 2018 from httpswwwsolarmarketcomautipssolar-panel-prices

Trump D J (2018 March 2) Tweets Twitter Page Retrieved 10August 2018 from httpstwittercomrealDonaldTrumpstatus969525362580484098

US Census Bureau (1949) Historical Statistics of the United States1789 - 1945 Washington DC United States Census Bureau

US Census Bureau (1975) Bicentennial Edition Historical Statisticsof the United States Colonial Times to 1970 WashingtonDC US Census Bureau

US Census Bureau (2018 July 12) Top Trading Partners - Decem-ber 2017 US Census Bureau Retrieved 18 July 2018 fromhttpswwwcensusgovforeign-tradestatisticshighlightstoptop1712yrhtml

US Census Bureau (2018 July 12) Trade in Goods with WorldSeasonally Adjusted United States Census Bureau Retrieved 10August 2018 from httpswwwcensusgovforeign-tradebalancec0004html

US Department of Commerce (2018) The Effect of Aluminum onthe National Security An Investigation Conducted underSection 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 as AmendedWashington D C United States Department of Commerce

US Department of Homeland Security (2018) Military Naturaliza-tion During WWII US Citizenship and Immigration ServiceRetrieved 28 September 2018 from httpswwwuscisgovhistory-and-genealogyour-historyagency-historymilitary-naturalization-during-wwii

US International Trade Commission (2010) US Imports AVE

Duties 1891-2008 US International Trade CommissionRetrieved 10 October 2018 from httpsdatawebusitcgovscriptsAVEPDF

US International Trade Commission (2017 October 31) USITCAnnounces Remedy Recommendations in its Global SafeguardInvestigation Involving Imports of Crystalline Silicon Photovol-taic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled intoOther Products United States International Trade Commissionhttpswwwusitcgovpress_roomnews_release2017er1031ll857htm

US Trade Representative (2018) Findings of the Investigation intoChinarsquos Acts Policies and Practices Related to TechnologyTransfer Intellectual Property and Innovation under Section301 of the Trade Act of 1974 Washington DC United StatesTrade Representative

Williams A amp Hauslohner A (2018 March 23) Hate Crimes Rosethe Day after Trump Was Elected FBI Data Show The Washing-ton Post Retrieved 3 October 2018 from httpswwwwashingtonpostcomnewspost-nationwp20180323hate-crimes-rose-the-day-after-trump-was-elected-fbi-data-shownoredirect=onamputm_term=4ca8532d9a56

World Steel Association (2018) World Steel in Figures 2018Brussels World Steel Association

WTO (2018 May 14) DS545 United States-Safeguard Measureon Imports of Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products WorldTrade Organization Retrieved 21 July 2018 from httpswwwwtoorgenglishtratop_edispu_ecases_eds545_ehtm

WTO (2018 May 14) DS546 United States-Safeguard Measureon Imports of Large Residential Washers World Trade Organi-zation Retrieved 21 July 2018 from httpswwwwtoorgenglishtratop_edispu_ecases_eds546_ehtm

Zeng K (2004) Trade Threats Trade Wars Bargaining Retaliationand American Coercive Diplomacy Ann Arbor The University ofMichigan Press


by showing that the US trade deficit to the world increasedfrom USD 73658 billion in 2016 to USD 79569 billionin 2017 (US Census Bureau 2018) In this context Chinain 2016 and 2017 became the most contributor with itstrade gap reaching from USD 347 billion (436 of UStotal world trade deficit) to USD 3752 billion (4715)(US Census Bureau 2018) The European Union (EU)Mexico Japan Vietnam Malaysia India South KoreaThailand Canada and Taiwan also become the next topcontributors by sharing around 57-58 of US total of worldtrade deficit

President Trumprsquos unease concern about such unfairinternational trade structure faced by the US was trans-lated into protectionist policies He ordered US Interna-tional Trade Commission (USITC) US Department ofCommerce (DoC) and US Trade Representative (USTR)to study about the potential harm done by trade partnerstoward US market and intellectual properties US govern-ment uses Section 201 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974

and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 Untilthis paper is written Trumprsquos safeguard trade policies tar-geted China Canada Mexico EU and South Korea asthe US lsquotrade belligerentsrsquo Cited from Bown and Kolb(2018) US imposed tariffs and quotas on imported steel(10) aluminum (25) washing machine solar paneland more than 1300 other products This trade policythen provokes those targeted countries to retaliate SouthKorea sued the US through the World Trade Organiza-tion (WTO) dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) for thewashing machine and the solar panelrsquos feud (WTO 2018)Mexico imposed tariffs on US potato apple cheese porkand dairy products worth approximately USD 3 billion(Swanson amp Tankersley 2018) Canada also imposed tar-iffs for USD 128 billion US steel aluminum tomato saucemaple syrup and orange juice exports (Canadian Depart-ment of Finance 2018) EU taxes US Harley Davidsonbourbon jeans and cranberries 25 of their worth (Bown2018) China the US biggest trade partner imposed more

Table 1 US EDR on trade belligerents 2016-2017

Table 2 EDR of trade belligerents on US 2016-2017

191
















193














195















197















199














201





























203





























































191
















193














195















197















199














201





























203





































































193














195















197















199














201





























203




































































195















197















199














201





























203





































































197















199














201





























203





































































199














201





























203




































































201





























203


















































































203





























































Donald Trump’s Protectionist Trade Policy from the ...

Documents

Transcript of Donald Trump’s Protectionist Trade Policy from the ...