Europe will retaliate by talking a lot.
Economist and economic historian. Directeur de Recherche, CNRS and Professor of Economics, Sciences Po, Paris. Website: kevinhorourke.com
8,094 followers 1,919 following 169 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Europe will retaliate by talking a lot.
Sometimes it's nice to remember that even Marcus Aurelius was like "you don't have to comment on everything bro"
Very useful discussion on the perils of using micro/cross-sectional parameter estimates in inferring the aggregate effects of policies/shocks. This is pervasive in Economics, yet the two effects can even have the opposite signs. (Example in next post.) voxdev.org/topic/method...
A tragic piece of news. Conor Gearty FBA was a wonderful human being, as kind as he was brilliant, thoughtful, self-deprecating and witty; a man of dialogue and convictions, always ready to listen, and one who had much to give the world.
Hands off Bradley. We need good managers making our domestic league internationally competitive.
Countries that don’t invest in the basics — coaching, training facilities, pathways for young players, domestic leagues — have no right to expect that they will do well in international football competitions #Ireland #worldcup #FAI
If the EP were to vote down this preposterous and illegal "deal" it would among other things mean that the Commission could credibly tell partners that there are limits to what is politically possible in Europe.
A regulatory superpower that can’t even regulate itself (if true)
The reality that Europe must acknowledge, in Ukraine and the transatlantic relationship open.substack.com/pub/billemmo...
We are deeply saddened to hear that former Finn Harps, Galway United and Fanad United coach Ollie Horgan has passed away. 💙 A massive loss for Irish football. 😢
One of the main benefits of doing a US PhD is the extra time you get, that's one of the big reasons I advised my students to apply for US programmes. We offer a four year degree here, there'd be no advantage over us. The US is euthanising its massive advantage in research for no good reason.
On a parochial (Shamrock Rovers) note well done to Darragh Burns with an assist and two successfully converted spot kicks.
Helt sikkert.
www.berlingske.dk/indland/mett...
If anyone is in position to know, she is. So: you can’t be a little bit sovereign, if you want to be the master in your own house you need to be sovereign across the board. That’s the agenda, and it has to start with Russia’s defeat in Ukraine. Time to massively scale up the Danish model
„We have a land war on European continent. We are fully dependent on US. None of the EU members was ready to risk further escalation“. The way @sabineweyand.bsky.social explains EU-US-deal is exactly right. She explains EU‘s trade-offs & rationale — and doesn‘t put lipstick on a pig. (SZ-Dossier)
📢 New initiative: we are launching a monthly virtual seminar in French Economic History to share and discuss the latest research in the field! 🌍 Open to all interested in #econhist. 👉 Info & updates: sites.google.com/view/vwfhe/h...
So much for the certainty that rewarding Trump for breaking the law provided us with. Show a bully that you’re weak and he’ll walk all over you. on.ft.com/3JzL772
Norwegians decide on the Nobel Peace Prize. They suffered under Nazi occupation. Nazi occupation was not peace. Russian occupation is not peace. Perhaps someone should explain this to Mr Trump.
This is a moment of truth for Europe. If our leaders don’t act to defend our vital interests there is no point in complaining about the failure of others to do so.
If the argument is that the EU had no choice in the trade talks but to reward the US for breaking the law, because we need its security support, then a consequence should be that if the US takes Russia’s side in demanding that Ukraine give up land, then all bets will be off as regards trade.
Economic history has lost one of its greats.
UK academics studying topics sensitive to China face harassment, survey finds – The Guardian: ‘reported instances of harassment from colleagues and pressure from university administrators related to the financial consequences of damaging relations with China.’
The hope, if you care about the multilateral system, which almost nobody seems to do, is that the whole thing will unravel…
A very reasonable question. I can't imagine that the French or Scandinavians will be thrilled, for example. Elsewhere, I don't know.
www.jobs.ac.uk/job/DOC329/t...
It may be that the EU walks back from this decision in the face of popular opposition. But if it doesn't then history will not be kind to those responsible. This is not about the interests of this or that industry, it is about something much much bigger that risks resonating down the decades.
A strategic disaster for the EU, given how it has always positioned itself on the world stage, given the importance of the rules-based order in maintaining world stability, and given the risks to that stability in an era of Putin, Xi, and Trump.
If this is accurate, then unless the EU eliminates all tariffs on industrial imports from all its WTO partners, it will be joining Trump in destroying the international trade rules that have applied since WW2. The difference being that while Trump hates the rule-based order the EU claims to value it
Correct headline today: EU endorses the drive-by killing of the postwar rules-based trading system and the most-favoured-nation principle.
Absolutely. We had a choice. A big American Brexit, or the dismantling of the whole system. That the EU is choosing the latter is shameful. And very much against its own interests.
Presumably the EU, as the great great promoter of international rules that we know it is, will offer these 0% tariffs to all WTO members?
My latest on the spectacularly one-sided EU-US trade deal.
Establishing a reputation for being a pushover, unwilling to bear costs in order to promote one’s interests, is also a threat to our physical security in a dangerous world. I suspect some citizens also intuitively understand this.
100%.
These two are some of the very rare good takes I've seen so far.
In the face of the most blatant trade coercion since at least 1945, the EU has failed to even activate its anti-coercion instrument, designed, as the name indicates, precisely for this purpose. It has let down trading partners less able to stand up to Trump's bullying and weakened multilateralism. 8
It is a world where I don’t see how the EU can anymore complain about, say, the UK not living up to its MFN obligations since it is not punishing, but rewarding, the US for precisely that.
So if I understand correctly the EU is making concessions so that the US can illegally charge it a base tariff rate 5% higher than that facing the UK? So much for European negotiating strength and EU commitment to the multilateral system @martinsandbu.ft.com @alanbeattie.bsky.social
I might add that there's a special responsibility on relatively large closed economies like the EU to stand up to Trump, since the aggregate costs of his protection and their retaliation will be relatively small for them. If they don't defend the system by punishing flagrant rule-breaking who will?
Another good piece by @alanbeattie.bsky.social . www.ft.com/content/2b92...
Can cooperative institutions be sustained if no-one is willing to incur costs in order to punish those breaking the rules? It doesn't seem (to date) that the international community is particularly committed to the rules that have governed trade since WW2. www.ft.com/content/82e3...
New KWP: Sanctions hurt - but not equally. @schularick.bsky.social, @kevinhorourke.bsky.social et al show: countries w/ undiversified exports, develop. economies, & EU financial hubs are most exposed to economic coercion. Drastic measures work - half-measures don’t 👉 www.ifw-kiel.de/publications...
📢 #CallForPapers To honour the memory of Ghazala Azmat, the Economics Department of SciencesPo is creating an award in her name. Junior researchers can submit a paper in economics of discrimination, gender, education & organizational #economics. Submit by 31 August. cepr.org/events/ghaza... #EconSky
I hope the headline is inaccurate since if our business and political leaders are shocked by something so predictable then that is actually very worrying.
If you are strong, but don't want to use your strength for fear of getting hurt, then you are in fact weak. Not the right signal to send in a dangerous world. www.ft.com/content/9b77...
Has anyone suggested what might be the most logical, and also most easily understood and pedagogical, response to Trump’s tariffs? Namely, if the USA defaults on its MFN obligations to others, then others should withdraw MFN status from the USA?
A nice tribute to Peter Neary by Patrick Honohan and Cormac Ó Gráda: www.ucd.ie/economics/t4... #econsky
If you are strong, but don't want to use your strength for fear of getting hurt, then you are in fact weak. Not the right signal to send in a dangerous world. www.ft.com/content/9b77...
#econhist
This is an important new paper and a great example of how getting the facts right can shape our views of what matters in history #econhist www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
@kevinhorourke.bsky.social writes about the history of the US commitment to non-discrimination in #trade through bitter lessons learned about aggressive retaliation and discusses how the #tariffs of the second Trump administration contrast starkly with that history. cepr.org/publications... #EconSky
If you're getting notifications from Academia(.)edu about AI versions of your papers now being podcasts, that's because the (predatory) platform has opted you into AI-enhanced outputs, which you can turn off in your Account Settings here.
@kevinhorourke.bsky.social & Roger Vicquery introduce a new index of global exchange rate fixity and find that global anchoring to the US dollar fell sharply after 1971, and global exchange rate fixity is now only about one-third of the Bretton Woods level. cepr.org/voxeu/column... #EconSky
🧵1/4 🚨 We have finalized our DID textbook! You’ve run out of excuses for sketchy pre-trends and mysterious TWFE coefficients. 📘 Credible Answers to Hard Questions: Differences-in-Differences for Natural Experiments By Chaisemartin & D’Haultfœuille. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
New ebook on the economic consequences of Trump: cepr.org/system/files...
ERC funding is one of the main professional benefits Europe can offer top academics contemplating careers here. To suggest that it be made a political plaything, especially given what is happening in the US, and how Europe is attempting to position itself in response, is quite something.
For those without access to Le Monde (but a subscription is well worth it, is there a better newspaper in the English-speaking world?) the website of the project in question is here. It seems like a perfectly normal, high quality scholarly venture… euqu.eu
Some rather disturbing details in this article, particularly regarding an interview given by a French government minister. Academic freedom is not just something whose absence elsewhere is to be regretted, it is non-negotiable in any free society.
Recently accepted by #QJE, “Manufacturing Revolutions: Industrial Policy and Industrialization in South Korea,” by Nathan Lane (@nathanlane.bsky.social): doi.org/10.1093/qje/...
Welcome to the Economic History Society's Bluesky account. Stay tuned for updates from the Economic History Review and the society's Long Run blog, as well as for information about our annual conference, fellowships and grants!
This is spot on by @alanbeattie.bsky.social . If you care about rules you don’t reward people for breaking them. (And in a dangerous world if you are perceived as weak you will be treated accordingly.) on.ft.com/4kb20Co Court tariffs bombshell should inspire trading partners to defy Trump
I hope so. This is not the time to show the world that you are weak. To deter you need to be willing to bear some costs. And setting aside the bilateral EU-US relationship, if you let the US tear up the rule book with no consequences then the days of countries respecting rules will be over.
This is bleak reading
The best in the business.
This #ScholarSunday take some time to read my latest paper in the EHR ✅ Iron age trade ✅ Reconstructed trade routes ✅ The resource curse ✅ Ancient export led growth ✅ Verifying Pliny’s great complaint A throwback to a more globalised time... #EconSky onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
This is good stuff. archaeologymag.com/2025/04/stud...
🙏 @kevinhorourke.bsky.social
Thank you.
#EconSky
Super interesting! "How Fixed are Global Exchange Rates?" by Kevin Hjortshøj O’Rourke and Roger H. Vicquéry "Our findings indicate that global exchange rate regimes are currently more than twice as flexible as they were prior to the 1971 Nixon shock." kevinhorourke.com/wp-content/u...
When next a teaching and learning person inquires as to my teaching methods I shall reply that I favour the in-person podcast.
The author argues that retaining young researchers is more realistic. I'd suggest that grad school in the US is no longer that attractive, and that Europe should ramp up support for PhDs. My memory from the UK is that getting financial support for excellent students was a constant headache.
"What do we lose by the Chinese raising tariffs on us?” he (Bessent) added. “We export one-fifth to them of what they export to us, so that is a losing hand for them.” This is useful, since there are probably other more favourable hands available to both China and Europe. www.ft.com/content/f91a...
It is the US administration that has been behaving extraordinarily and nobody else. Countries are under no obligation to only retaliate in areas where the US has an advantage. The way to save the world trading system is to make them regret their choices by retaliating where they are vulnerable.
The US is ignoring WTO rules regarding trade in goods. Why should it enjoy WTO rules regarding trade in services? And how does anyone expect the rules-based system. on which countries like Ireland depend, to survive, if countries can pick and choose what rules to follow? www.rte.ie/news/politic...
Britain’s obsession with trying to negotiate exemptions from Trump’s tariffs is entirely the wrong approach. The overwhelming national interest lies in working with others to stand up to Trump and try to preserve as much as possible of the global trading system. Mark Carney is showing the way
We should believe them and act accordingly on.ft.com/4230YBZ
That is indeed the question. Have there been studies on the impact of TRIPS on the US? But you would think that Big Tech and the stock market would not enjoy the experience.
Or you could do both.
The second is to ask what it was that the US was particularly keen on obtaining in the Uruguay Round and withdraw those benefits from it. #nocherrypicking
There seem to me to be at least two logical ways of retaliating against the Trump tariffs. The first is the Chinese method which has the great advantage of complete transparency and understandability. It is also self-evident what any subsequent negotiations would involve.
On the other side of the equation European firms are now at a major advantage in the Chinese market vis à vis the US. Shouldn’t be forgotten either.
I agree.
One entirely predictable irony in all of this is that Trump will end up creating what had previously existed only as a fantasy in that strange brain of his, namely a world in which the US faces discriminatory tariffs in all its major markets. So be it.
China’s response is not the start of a global trade war since it only targets the USA. It is how you would expect a major player to respond. This is not the global economy breaking down, it is not the 1930s, it is not the formation of multiple imperial blocs, it is the US isolating itself.
Perhaps we could abolish money? That ought to do the trick.
Donald Trump's new tariffs may be in violation of #NATO article 2, says Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide (Ap):
If the US can disregard the most basic of WTO rules with impunity, why should anyone else obey those rules they find irksome? So I am puzzled when people caution against retaliation. It is required, or the whole rules based WTO edifice will eventually collapse. Retaliation is pro-globalisation.
Nor are we in a Great Depression caused by flawed macroeconomic policies, the main reason why the total value of trade fell in the 30s. The rest of the world just needs to obey the rules vis à vis each other, retaliate intelligently against the US, and the big loser will end up being the US.
1. @abenewman.bsky.social and I have a new piece in @foreignaffairs.com on Big Tech's bad bargain with Trump - www.foreignaffairs.com/united-state... . Meta etc were settling in for a manageable - possibly even profitable - tech confrontation with China. They're getting one with Europe instead.
The WTO is a complex bargain. No country should expect to be able to withdraw from bits of the agreement it doesn't like, and keep enjoying the bits that it does like. Especially if it is withdrawing from the most central rule of all, non-discrimination. #nocherrypicking #TRIPS
It’s a very fundamental point. Generalized MFN was article 1 of the GATT for a reason. This is the US effectively saying goodbye to the WTO, or at least to the rules that define it
Important that the rest of the world not abandon this fundamental principle, for political as well as economic reasons. If that happens the damage can be limited, while as countries retaliate the US will eventually find itself with the least favorable trading relationships of any major economy.
Just as important as the general increase in tariffs is the complete abandonment of the principle of non-discrimination, which the US had traditionally championed. This will further increase international tensions at a time when the US is ripping up the post-1945 security architecture.
I am no expert but this seems promising (and Swiss): proton.me
If the IT departments of publicly funded universities didn’t oblige us all to have Google accounts that would be a good start and worth doing for its own sake on.ft.com/4hP1Bn7
There is an obvious link between the Harvard story and this one. Trying to mollify Trump won't work; western democracies should act together (and if news reports are accurate, the East Asians have already figured this out: good for them).
European governments need to stand up for Denmark, our neighbor, friend, and ally, against this outrageous, disgusting behavior of the US government. NATO needs to say: “Enough already!” bsky.app/profile/thom...
The former ambassador to Denmark for the United States, Rufus Gifford, posted this video on his Facebook account: Ht: @hpsc24.bsky.social