Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
During his inaugural meeting with Donald Trump at the 2019 G7 summit in Biarritz, Boris Johnson expressed optimism about the potential for a post-Brexit trade deal with the United States. He highlighted an array of British goods that could benefit from such an agreement, ranging from pork pies to shower trays.
Despite the apparent rapport between Johnson and Trump and the commencement of formal discussions the following year, a comprehensive trade agreement never materialized.
Recent developments, however, suggest that the UK and US might be shifting their focus away from a broad free trade agreement toward a more limited economic partnership. This shift follows Keir Starmer’s recent visit to Washington.
Discussions from Downing Street indicate that officials are considering a narrower scope, emphasizing technological collaboration rather than an expansive trade framework.
This strategic pivot is perhaps due to a longstanding reluctance within the US to engage in extensive trade agreements with other nations, a sentiment that predates the Trump administration. The last new free trade agreement enacted by the US was with Colombia in 2011; since then, the focus has primarily been on renegotiating existing agreements, as seen with the USMCA, which replaced NAFTA in 2020.
Regarding the UK, any broad trade arrangement would likely spark contentious issues, particularly in agriculture where the US employs practices, such as chlorine-washing chickens, that the UK may resist. Additionally, the National Health Service (NHS) has been perceived as a significant target for American companies in the life sciences sector.
Previous US negotiating objectives explicitly sought to secure “comprehensive market access for US agricultural goods in the UK.” Additionally, Labour’s ambition for a stronger trade relationship with the EU complicates the situation, as aligning with US food standards could jeopardize any existing agreements with Brussels.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has stated that the NHS would not be bargaining fodder in any negotiation; however, he did highlight the potential for data sharing that could benefit UK patients by facilitating access to innovative treatments. This suggestion has raised concerns among privacy advocates, as it touches on sensitive data management.
“We’re not in the business of selling off people’s data, but regarding data access, the NHS can serve as a strong ally for clinical trials,” he noted recently.
John Springford from the Centre for European Reform posited that a restricted, technology-oriented agreement might involve the UK aligning its regulatory stance on artificial intelligence with the US. The US’s criticisms of the EU’s stringent AI laws indicate a possible alignment of interests.
Moreover, the UK and US’s joint refusal to endorse a declaration on “inclusive and sustainable” AI at the recent Paris summit could signal an emerging consensus on technology policy.
Given the UK’s commitment to enhancing its defense budget, there could also be opportunities for collaboration in arms procurement, although past moments, such as Trump’s apparent oversight of the AUKUS security alliance, have raised questions about US attention to such partnerships.
The primary objective of any prospective deal, nonetheless, will likely not revolve around creating new markets for products like pork pies or shower trays, but rather around avoiding the tariffs implemented by a second Trump administration as it seeks to redefine the global trading landscape.
This scenario represents a significant departure from the extensive agreements envisioned by Brexit proponents, which aimed to redraw the UK’s economic relationships in favor of the US over the EU. However, given the geopolitical landscape, a limited deal could still yield considerable advantages.
Source
www.theguardian.com