A Targeted Retaliation Strategy

So the Americans have gone ahead and slapped a 10% tariff on UK goods. Not entirely out of the blue – there were rumblings, and the usual backchannel grunts from Washington – but still, it’s a punch in the ribs however politely it was telegraphed. The Starmer government, to its credit or naivety, had been trying the old charm offensive. Lots of quiet diplomacy, friendly overtures, and talk of rekindling that famous “special relationship” – a phrase that now mostly serves to remind us how one-sided it’s become.

The thinking, presumably, was that if we were reasonable – if we played the grown-up, avoided confrontation, and said all the right things – then Washington, even under Trump, might return the favour. It hasn’t. It’s slapped tariffs on our exports anyway. Whether it’s pure protectionism, domestic political theatre, or part of a wider anti-European grudge doesn’t really matter. The outcome is the same: British exporters are now 10% more expensive in a market we’ve long been told was our post-Brexit salvation.

Now the question is whether we respond – and how. Some argue we shouldn’t. That retaliation risks escalation. That the UK is too small to win a trade spat with the US. That we should bide our time, keep negotiating, and not risk derailing whatever scraps of goodwill might still be floating about in Washington.

But doing nothing has a cost. Not just economically, but strategically. It sends a signal – to the US, and to every other potential trade partner – that Britain is willing to absorb economic punishment in silence. That our supposed sovereignty is ornamental. That we’re still, after everything, hoping that if we just behave ourselves, the grown-ups will let us sit at the table.

That approach might once have passed for diplomacy. Now it looks more like weakness.

So yes, we should respond. But with care. Not with bombast. Not with a trade war. With precision. Tariff those American imports that are politically sensitive and economically expendable. Bourbon. Motorbikes. Citrus. Branded clothing. Processed food. Things we can easily substitute – but which American exporters will notice. And every pound raised from those tariffs should go straight into a fund for UK exporters hit by the US action. A practical, contained countermeasure – not a tantrum.

This isn’t about one-upmanship. It’s about consequences. If you make it painless to target British industry, don’t be surprised when it keeps happening. The world’s full of economic bullies. The trick is not to act like one – but not to invite them in for lunch either.

Starmer’s approach wasn’t wrong. He was playing the only cards he had – charm, predictability, and polite overtures. But when that fails - although 10% rather than 20% is a success of sorts - doing nothing isn’t prudence, it’s surrender. We don’t need to match Trump’s fire with fire. Just a cold, well-aimed nudge that makes clear there’s a price to pushing Britain around.

Trade should be fair. And when it isn’t, someone has to pay.

Perhaps the State Visit invitation should be withdrawn, citing security reasons - Charles may shoot him accidentally on a grouse shoot.