Lost in today’s trade debate is the primary question: Is America being treated fairly? Those answering the question “yes” can preemptively dismiss Trump’s tariff strategy.

However, if, as most Americans believe, the answer is “no,” then it invites the question of whether we address it, and if so, how. With his tariff strategy, Trump has given his answers.

There’s no such thing as free trade. It’s like a frictionless machine in physics or zero transaction costs in economics. They don’t exist, except as goals toward which we strive. This doesn’t mean the concepts don’t serve a useful purpose, despite our acceptance that they can’t be achieved.

Free trade’s most useful purpose is as a yardstick for measuring our trade relationships. That America’s tariff relationships are frequently imbalanced (both by tariffs and non-tariff barriers) to our exports’ detriment and our domestic jobs’ loss — often significantly — is irrefutable.

This then poses a choice: Do we accept the barriers to free trade or attempt to reduce them? If the goal is truly free trade, then we cannot accept them.

So, how do we seek to reduce them? “Negotiate them away” is the historical response. Yet what incentive do trading partners who hold disproportionate advantages have to negotiate these away? Unless they are offered an equally disproportionate advantage, which of course, leaves America disadvantaged, they have no incentive to negotiate away their advantages.

As a result, for decades, they have not. Which is why America........

© The Hill