There are moments in public policy when you don’t need to argue anymore. You just lean back, sip your kopi, read the headlines — and whisper, “I told you so.”
The recent decision by the United States Supreme Court striking down former President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff move was one of those moments. Because suddenly, all those who were shouting that Malaysia had “kowtowed” to the United States over ART are looking… slightly less certain.
You remember them. The opposition politicians who saw weakness everywhere. The conservative voices who declared sovereignty under siege. The opportunists within the ruling coalition who mistook theatrics for strategy.
Apparently, some believed that dealing with Trump was like negotiating a municipal by-law or unregistered temple. It wasn’t.
The Reality of Trump’s Tariff Era
Trump’s trade style was simple: shock first, legal theory later. He used emergency powers to impose broad tariffs. Dramatic. Headline-grabbing. Politically energising.
But constitutionally fragile. The Supreme Court ruling made that clear. Tariff powers ultimately sit with Congress. Executive overreach has limits.
Now here’s the irony: the very unpredictability that critics demanded Malaysia “stand up against” was precisely why MITI chose a calibrated approach. Because when U.S. trade policy can change with a press conference, you don’t gamble with your export lifeline.
Semiconductor First, Politics Later
Malaysia’s semiconductor industry is not a talking point. It is infrastructure. Jobs. Supply chains. Long-term positioning.
The United States remains a critical export market. Any disruption — retaliatory tariffs, targeted investigations, licensing restrictions — could have real economic consequences.
ART was not about surrender. It was about ensuring market access remained intact; investor confidence stayed stable; and Malaysia avoided being caught in retaliatory crossfire
While critics were busy drafting fiery press statements, MITI was managing risk.
In Parliament, the new MITI Minister, Johari Abdul Ghani, responded in a manner that was refreshingly measured. He explained that the government’s approach was designed to safeguard Malaysia’s semiconductor ecosystem and preserve strategic trade ties.
And, he reminded critics that policy decisions must consider economic realities, not political theatrics.
Translation: We don’t manage exports with ego. He made clear that engagement with the U.S. was tactical — ensuring continuity regardless of shifts in Washington’s internal politics. That is called governance.
Can Trump Work Around the Court?
Of course, Trump may try. He could pivot to other statutory tools. The Trade Act. Sectoral measures. Narrower tariffs framed under national security.
But here’s where economics meets politics. U.S. growth has already shown signs of slowing. Inflation remains sensitive. American consumers are increasingly aware that tariffs function like a hidden tax — raising the cost of everyday goods.
And mid-term politics changes everything. Members of Congress facing elections do not enjoy explaining rising prices to voters. They are far less likely to give sweeping trade authority or tolerate aggressive tariff expansions that push up costs.
Even if Trump invokes alternative provisions under trade legislation, they are narrower, more procedural, and politically constrained. They do not offer the same sweeping freedom he attempted before.
In short: legal creativity cannot override economic gravity.
Public Awareness Has Shifted
During the earlier tariff waves, many voters framed trade battles as strategic muscle-flexing. Today, cost of living dominates kitchen-table conversations. When prices rise, narratives shift quickly.
Tariffs are no longer abstract geopolitical tools. They show up on receipts. That political awareness makes it harder to expand broad-based tariff regimes — especially ahead of elections.
Congress cannot be taken for granted. And mid-term cycles sharpen caution.
So Where Does That Leave Malaysia?
For Malaysia, the situation is — importantly — stable. ART does not need dramatic cancellation. It was never a surrender document. It was a stabilisation instrument.
If the Supreme Court ruling results in lower effective tariffs or fewer unilateral trade shocks, that benefits Malaysia. Lower tariffs mean more predictable export costs; smoother semiconductor flows; stronger investor sentiment; and most importantly: reduced volatility.
The greatest risk during the Trump tariff era was not disagreement. It was unpredictability. That risk is now mitigated. Not eliminated — but reduced.
Sovereignty Versus Strategy
The loudest critics treated sovereignty as volume control. If you shout loudly enough, apparently sovereignty increases. But sovereignty in economic policy is measured differently.
It is measured by whether your factories continue operating; whether your export markets remain open; and whether your industrial base strengthens rather than weakens.
Malaysia did not give away control of its semiconductor industry. We did not abandon policy autonomy. We did not lock ourselves into irreversible concessions. We navigated uncertainty.
There’s a difference.
The Long Game Pays Off
Had Malaysia taken a confrontational path purely for domestic applause, we might now be scrambling to repair trade channels while the same critics quietly revise their tone. Instead, we played the long game.
We acknowledged that Trump was not an easy or conventional negotiating partner. A bit of diplomacy. A bit of reassurance. A bit of finesse. Not surrender. Calibration.
And when the Supreme Court confirms that the original tariff architecture was legally unstable, it validates the instinct to avoid escalation. Because sometimes the smartest move is not to win the argument.
It is to avoid unnecessary damage while others argue.
Quiet Conclusion
Trump may still test legal boundaries. He may try narrower routes. Trade politics in the U.S. will remain noisy. But growth constraints, inflation sensitivity, voter awareness, and mid-term realities impose limits.
Malaysia’s strategy ensured we were insulated from the worst-case scenario. ART bought stability in an unstable moment. And now, as the dust settles and legal checks assert themselves, the semiconductor sector remains intact, U.S. market access remains viable, and volatility has eased.
So yes. Perhaps a small, polite smile is in order.
Not triumph. Just the quiet satisfaction of knowing that while some were busy shouting, others were calculating.
No comments:
Post a Comment