The Trump Administration under the lens of three USI experts

The Trump Administration 2.0 has just begun and is already a topic of much discussion. In addition to the numerous authoritative voices, there are those of Prof. Giovanni Barone Adesi, Professor Emeritus at the Faculty of Economics of the Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), Prof. Edoardo Beretta, Adjunct Professor at the Faculty of Economics, and Alberto Bitonti, Lecturer at the Faculty of Communication, Culture and Society, who analysed the tycoon's moves from an economic and communicative point of view in articles featured in Corriere del Ticino and Ticinonline, as well as during the radio programme Alphaville (Rete Due - RSI).

Beginning with an economic analysis, Trump announced tariffs on imports from Mexico, Canada and China, which are among the United States' main trading partners. The first two countries were granted a thirty-day pause, while from the beginning of February 2025, goods from China will face an additional general tariff of 10%. In response, Beijing has decided to impose new tariffs of up to 15% on certain goods and products imported from the United States, effective February 10. Tariffs could be a strategy adopted by the Trump Administration to address the substantial trade deficit that the United States is facing. "In 2023, the U.S. trade deficit—defined as the difference between imports from the rest of the world and exports—reached $797 billion in just one year. This indicates that the United States is accumulating debt with the rest of the world at an alarming rate, a situation that has escalated significantly since the start of the pandemic," commented Professor Edoardo Beretta. "In reality, this situation has been chronic since 1971." The tariff strategy aims to discourage imports without stimulating internal production. It is a strategy that reflects a climate of geopolitical tension and shows the will to counter imports from China.

However, according to Professor Giovanni Barone Adesi, they could be considered a useful tool for negotiating agreements: "Donald Trump is adept at quickly changing policies. In fact, tariffs seem to serve as a negotiating tool; however, Trump shows little interest in implementing them once the countries he is negotiating with reach an agreement with the United States." Furthermore, Professor Beretta emphasises how tariffs can represent a bargaining chip for the United States: "The USA uses tariffs as a bargaining chip with other countries to achieve a whole series of other objectives. For example, in 2023, the United States imported 450 billion dollars worth of goods from China. So I don't believe that the ultimate aim of this measure is to harm the end consumer, but to use the tariff to make the United States strong again, also from a contractual point of view, with regard to its trading partners."

The suspension of tariffs against Canada and Mexico following some concessions on immigration by the two countries would have represented a success for the President's image, as confirmed to Alphaville by Professor Edoardo Beretta: "Trump has demonstrated a notable agility and speed in his actions. It's important to keep in mind that he will need to move quickly, as the primaries for selecting the next candidates from both parties will begin before the end of his term. This timeline may reduce his visibility in the political arena." Is the choice of Mexico and Canada to comply with the demands of the United States also an ideal path for Europe? "I believe it is important to have an ongoing dialogue with the US," said Professor Beretta, "however, I do not share the opinion that the European Union should buy more from the United States as a negotiating tool." Trump's economic strategy must also deal with the financial sector, which currently does not seem responsive to the President's requests. He has asked for a reduction in the federal funds interest rates, but the Federal Reserve has chosen to keep them unchanged.

As of now, the Trump Administration has not outlined a clear strategy for reducing public debt, nor has it set specific objectives in this regard. However, during the electoral campaign, Trump frequently voiced his preference for a weaker dollar to promote the export of American products and discourage the import of foreign goods. "Trump certainly wants a weaker dollar," said Professor Giovanni Barone Adesi, "but this is clearly not convenient for other countries, including Switzerland. Regarding public spending, the goal is to decrease it, at least in part, through the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) led by Elon Musk. Reducing spending on federal administration will cut the supply of dollars, assuming the Federal Reserve cooperates with the government. Moreover, since there is a certain supply of dollars in circulation that must be absorbed by international markets, markets that then export goods to receive these dollars if the supply of dollars decreases, there is also less reason to export."

Analysing the communication style, the new President of the United States appears aggressive, not only in content but also, above all, in his methods. As Alberto Bitonti explains, Trump's communication introduces a significant novelty: "The novelty is more in the political context than in the language. Sometimes, very strong tones are used during an election campaign. They tend to polarise the electorate to appeal to their voters. Then, once in government, even the most radical leaders tend to become more moderate. Because, once they have won the elections, faced with the responsibilities of government, they tend to seek more balanced positions. And there is also a state apparatus that moderates the most extreme demands. On the other hand, Trump maintains a tone that is at least as strong as during the election campaign. And he is also trying to dismantle some of the counter-powers of the U.S. democratic system."

Trump presents himself differently from most leaders by adopting a villainous persona and negotiating in a tough and aggressive manner. "It's a typical dynamic of polarisation. When I attack my opponents head-on, I reinforce the group's identity that supports me. In the past, several authoritarian (but sometimes also democratic) leaders have used the "enemy of the people" card, which consists of identifying enemies to be attacked. It is an old technique that makes the group that supports the leader more cohesive," explained Alberto Bitonti. The enemy ends up being the political adversary, and the dynamic illustrated by the USI professor is nothing more than one of the effects of excessive political polarisation. "While some level of polarisation in politics is normal, when it becomes extreme, it creates divisions that extend beyond politics and into the social realm. The current information landscape, primarily shaped by social media, which often rewards divisive behaviour, poses an additional risk. Misinformation has the potential to spread much more easily and quickly than it did in the past."

However, there are antidotes and alternatives to Trump's rhetoric: "It's a complex problem. However, I would say that one way to combat that rhetoric is to emphasise what unites the citizens of a country rather than what divides them. In the recent history of the United States, for example, President Obama has frequently employed the rhetoric of unity, emphasising what unites citizens, whether they are Americans, Europeans, Swiss, or any other country," concluded Alberto Bitonti.

The full interview with Professor Giovanni Barone Adesi, by Dimitri Loringett for Corriere del Ticino, is available at the following link, and the interview with Professor Edoardo Beretta on Alphaville (Rete Due - RSI) is available at the following link. The full interview with Alberto Bitonti, by Simone Re for Ticinonline, is available at the following link. (all Italian only)