Are Tariffs Always “Self-Destructive”? Lessons from History

 

Tariff Strategy Isn’t Unique to Trump

Tariffs have long been deployed strategically — from Alexander Hamilton’s early 19th-century tariffs to postwar protectionism, to the Smoot–Hawley episode, and modern trade wars. Some succeeded in reforming trade terms; others backfired horribly.

• The U.S. used “safe guard” tariffs in the 1980s to pressure Japan on auto imports, prompting negotiations.

• South Korea imposed countermeasures in the 1980s and ’90s to defend nascent industries, with mixed domestic cost.

• The Smoot–Hawley tariffs of 1930 deepened the Great Depression — a vivid cautionary tale, but also one colored by extreme protectionism and breakdown of global trade norms.

Thus, labeling all tariffs “self-destructive” forecloses the possibility of calibrated, conditional, or reciprocal tariffs which may coerce better trade behavior.

1.2 Differentiating Between Broad Tariffs and Strategic Tariffs

A blanket tariff on all imports is far more dangerous (import substitution, inflation, supply shocks) than a narrow, targeted tariff intended to address unfair practices or strategic goods.

• Selective tariffs: applied to sectors with trade imbalances or national security implications.

• Escalating tariffs: starting low, increasing only if counterparties fail to respond.

• Reciprocal tariffs: matched to the harm done to U.S. exporters.

Thus, whether a tariff is “self-destructive” depends heavily on its design, duration, and enforcement.