El conflicto comercial arancelario entre Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea

Review of “El conflicto comercial arancelario entre Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea” by José Luis Herrero José Luis Herrero offers a meticulous legal and political analysis of the ongoing trade dispute between the United States and the European Union, triggered by U.S. tariffs on imported aluminum and steel, as well as on derivative products. His article contextualizes the conflict within the broader historical and legal framework of U.S. trade policy, starting from the first presidency of Donald J. Trump and extending into the renewed tensions under his second mandate. The article’s strength lies in its precise and well-documented chronicle of presidential proclamations and regulatory countermeasures, referencing key instruments such as Proclamations 9704 and 9705, the 1962 Trade Expansion Act (Section 232), and the EU’s retaliatory instruments like Implementing Regulations (EU) 2018/724 and 2020/502. Herrero astutely demonstrates how the invocation of national security exceptions under Section 232—a controversial move—has served as a legal pretext for broad protectionist measures, raising complex questions about the compatibility of such actions with WTO rules. Particularly compelling is Herrero’s explanation of the procedural use of WTO dispute mechanisms, including Article XIII of GATT 1994 and the Marrakech Agreement’s Dispute Settlement Understanding. He navigates deftly through the reciprocal claims of illegality and the subsequent resort to arbitration, illustrating the legal impasse between economic diplomacy and multilateral commitments. Moreover, the article provides valuable insight into the shifts brought about by the Biden administration, which marked a temporary de-escalation of trade tensions through tariff-rate quotas and the mutual suspension of retaliatory measures. Yet, Herrero signals that these diplomatic gains have proven fragile. The resurgence of Trump to the presidency—and his immediate reinstatement of broad and punitive tariff regimes through Proclamations 10895 and 10896—marks a renewed phase of economic confrontation, underscored by politically charged threats such as imposing a 200% tariff on European wine. Herrero's legal commentary is rigorous and timely. His review of institutional responses, both from the European Commission and the U.S. executive, highlights the legal elasticity within trade law and the limits of current multilateral dispute mechanisms to resolve politically motivated trade wars. The article also underscores the EU’s preparedness to respond, with a regulatory roadmap poised to take effect immediately following the expiration of tariff suspensions on April 1, 2025.