Before you read this article, try hard to click on "Attention", which is both convenient for you to discuss and share, but can bring you a different sense of participation, thank you for your support!
Edited by: X
U.S. President Trump’s plane landed in Britain on Tuesday, local time, the second time in the year, less than two months after his last visit.
On the surface, this state visit is filled with a friendly ceremonial sense, and in the public agenda of Trump, the most prominent is with The meeting between King Charles and Queen Camilla, whom he affectionately referred to as "long-time friends".
However, this visit is not just a simple catch-up. Behind it, it clearly reflects the division and contradiction between the "special allies" of the United States and Britain in the 21st century.
On the one hand, the intense friction on the issue of steel tariffs, each other uncompromising. On the other hand, but in the field of future-oriented technology and defense, tens of billions of dollars of cooperation plans have been announced.
The Customs.
After all, polite words on diplomatic occasions can't cover up the real gap of interests. Steel tariffs are a besieged city between the two countries, which makes the relationship between the United States and Britain extremely embarrassing. Trump verbally said that he was willing to "help" Britain and help them "slightly improve" the trade agreement, which sounded full of goodwill.
But what about reality? The British government has quietly halted negotiations for a zero-tariff deal.The reason is simple, the tax-free conditions issued by Americans are too strict: Steel has to be "smelted and cast" in England soil.This seems to be a technical clause, but it is like a precision-guided missile that directly hits the key points of the British steel industry.
Everyone knows that Tata Steel has shut down the blast furnace, and Britain simply cannot meet this requirement. To restore this ability, at least we have to wait until the new electric arc furnace is completed in 2027. This technical barrier is not so much trade protection as a precise blow by taking advantage of the other party's industrial shortcomings.
In the face of this impasse, the British official statement seems somewhat pale. They tried to portray a 25% tariff as a victory.It claims to have made Britain the “only beneficiary” and the “reliable supplier” of the United States, providing at least “certainty.” After all, other countries face tariffs of up to 50%.
The words of Gareth Staes, Director General of the British Steel Association, were more like a relentless self-consolation. The hope of zero tariffs is disappointing, but a 25% tax rate does offer a “certainty” or even a “potential competitive advantage” when others are subjected to heavy taxes.
But the opposition does not buy the bills. Conservative spokesman Andrew Griffiths opened fire directly, denouncing Prime Minister Stammer’s announcement of zero tariffs on May 8 as “false words.” The argument, vividly depicting a tense picture of Britain facing heavy pressure at home and abroad, being forced to reshape the speech system.
The future business is negotiated
At the negotiating table of the traditional industry, there is no negotiation, but on the other track, the United States and Britain are stepping on the oil gate and advancing rapidly. The stagnation of the steel issue forms a huge contrast, and a "cooperative fast track" to the future is being actively opened.
A new economic deal of more than $10 billion is about to be announced.This is not a small number, but this huge investment is like a windward landmark, pointing straight to the strategic highlands of the future. Money will pour into key sectors such as technology, defense, finance and energy.
The two countries plan to publish a blueprint for scientific and technological cooperation involving new investments of billions of dollars.The defense technology cooperation agreement will also be finalized.The links between London and New York, the two major global financial centers, will be further deepened.
The best reflection of strategic mutual trust between the two sides is cooperation in the field of nuclear power. The two countries plan to sign an agreement to recognize each other's reactor safety assessments. This means that cooperation has gone deep into the core level of technical standards and national security, which is a very high degree of mutual trust.
The top design of this collaboration is also highly fragmented. Trump and Stammer will be holding a roundtable meeting with leaders of the tech community in the prime minister’s rural residence.The list of participants is Starlight Glimmer, including Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. This has gone beyond ordinary business talks, and is more like a deep binding of the top-level strategies of the two countries.
Tears of whiskey
When all the light bulbs are turned to chip and AI, some traditional issues are inevitably marginalized.The Scottish whiskey tariff issue is such a disoriented “accommodation.”
For a long time, Britain has been lobbying the United States in hopes of lowering the current 10% import tariffs on whiskey, however, according to U.S. officials, this is not a matter of urgency. They have hinted that it is unlikely that there will be any progress on the issue during Trump’s visit.
This tepid attitude clearly reflects that traditional trade demands have become insignificant in the higher priority agendas of the two countries. When a country is busy laying out the global hegemony of the next era, who has the mind to bother with the tax rate of a few bottles of wine?
Trump’s own concerns prove this from the side. He himself said that the primary task of the route was to meet the King and the Queen. The ceremonial diplomatic activities were clearly placed in a position of priority over negotiating trade details.Comparing the vague prospects of whisky and drug tariffs, and looking at the upcoming deal between science and technology and defense in the field, the feeling of "thick and thin" is stronger.
conclusion
Trump’s trip to Britain was far from a simple diplomatic show, which revealed the so-called “special relationship” undergoing a profound and painful structural restructuring.
The relationship between the two countries presents a strange “double track”: In traditional industrial fields such as steel, the two sides are in constant friction, struggling, and full of haggling over every ounce in the old times.
However, in the field of high-tech and strategic security for the future, the alliance relationship has been redefined and accelerated. The two sides are making unprecedented efforts to jointly invest and shape emerging strategic areas.
In the end, the rust of steel and the blueprint of the chip, these two seemingly unrelated images, together make up the most real and complex picture of current U.S. and British relations.