Trump's failed policies

If, with North Korea, Trump's tactics, threatening and then obtaining a result, seemed to have taken effect, Iran did not go the same way. Not even with Pyongyang, since Kim Jong-un's promises seemed untrue and the North Korean country did not begin promised denuclearization. Tehran had made it clear from the start: Iran is not North Korea, and although the Asian nation is experiencing a very difficult economic moment, it has refused to re-discuss the already signed nuclear treaty. For the administration of the White House it is a diplomatic defeat, which announces the failure of American foreign policy. North Korea has the perception that Trump has made fun of it, while the US, withdrawing from the nuclear treaty unilaterally, ratifies their unreliability at the international level. The effects of US credibility are to fall further and further down, altering relations with historical allies. What is being created is an ever greater distance between the two sides of the Atlantic, which could seriously endanger established situations, such as the Atlantic Pact, which risk being overwhelmed by an impromptu policy and outside the canons of good diplomatic sense. This is also because Trump intends to oblige the signatories of the agreement to adhere to its dictates, through direct pressure on companies in those countries, with the explicit prohibition of operating in the US if they continue to maintain business relations with Tehran. This pattern seems to be repeated even in the policy on tariffs, but even in this field the reaction produced by China seems to be difficult to contrast, because it aims to directly hit US companies that generate huge gains thanks to cheap Chinese labor. The most important example is Beijing's action against Apple, which is required to share earnings in China. For many American companies, the Chinese market represents the second largest area after the domestic market, and it will be interesting to see what their reaction will be when they are crushed between the wishes of Washington and the retaliation of Beijing. Returning to the Iranian question, if the intention of German car manufacturers seems to be to abandon the Iranian market, not to jeopardize the American one, already in danger for the possible inclusion of duties, other nations, through their executives, a official position, therefore, and not the initiative of a single firm, reject American taxation. In this sense it is important to reject the government of London, which remains the main ally of the US, to adapt to the wishes of Trump. The European Union will try to support companies that have signed commercial contracts with Iran, proving to be alternative to the United States and also to be more reliable internationally, respecting the agreements signed. At this moment the White House can receive the support of important allies, but more marginal than Europe, but, above all, its policy seems to be counterproductive, both to its international blazon, and to the economic aspect. The reasoning of the trade balance, which must always be active towards each commercial partner, without considering the benefits induced resulting, for example, from the convenience of importing some products that are not burdened by incoming duties, seems to be applied also to international politics, where it is important to impose the vision of the American president without any mitigation, to take into account the opinions and the role of the allies. The isolation that Trump is imposing on the United States will soon require a price to pay and it will certainly not be low: the only hope is that the Americans will already realize it at the next electoral events.