The announcement that the United States intends to impose tariffs on steel and aluminium imports should come as no great surprise to Australia.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
US President Donald Trump's protectionist tendencies have been on display for all to see since the election campaign, where his message of "America First" carried with it an implied promise to put the interests of its trade partners, even allies like Australia, second.
One of his first acts as President was to pull the US out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, part of a wider anti-globalisation stance, warning trade liberalisation had cost Americans jobs and market share.
The US also has form in this area, having slapped tariffs on steel imports in 2002, causing widespread retaliation from major steel producing nations.
The announcement of a new wave of tariffs - 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium - have many in this country worried.
Former trade minister Craig Emerson has gone as far as saying the US is trying to destroy the global trading system, while some industry groups have warned the move could spark a catastrophic trade war.
Australia is hoping that it will be able to dodge much or all of the tariffs, much as it did in 2002 when it successfully negotiated an 85 per cent exemption. But signs are less encouraging this time around, with one of Trump's top trade advisors, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, warning there will be no country exemptions.
The inevitable response from affected steel producing countries will be to respond in kind, and disputes before the World Trade Organisation could well result, pushing up prices and putting pressure on jobs. But Australia would do well to not follow down that path.
As Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said over the weekend, such measures only lead to dead ends - there are no winners from trade wars.
While other affected countries may choose to respond in kind, Mr Turnbull is right to push back against protectionism and hope that it leads to a change of heart from his erratic US counterpart.
While tariffs and industry assistance measures appeal to industries feeling the pressure of international competition, imposing them only results in eventual decreases in competition and efficiency, which ultimately has its own consequences. The 2002 measures ultimately caused more harm than good to the US economy in both GDP and employment.
Australian governments of the 1980s and 1990s fought hard to resist significant pressure from businesses seeking protection from an increasingly globalised marketplace. The decision to phase down tariffs and eliminate import quotas was central to jolting the Australian economy back to life after years of stagnation.
There appears to be broad understanding on both sides of politics for the need to avoid a tit-for-tat response, should Australia find itself unable to negotiate its way around a new wave of US trade barriers.
While the signs at this stage are not particularly encouraging, Australia's best hope lies in pushing for exemptions for its products and trying to convince the US that protectionist policies, while attractive to industry in the short term, will ultimately make America less competitive and harm its own economy.
Global markets are here to stay and the countries that do well will be the ones that remake themselves so as to compete on a world stage, rather than building fences to prop up less competitive domestic industries.
Australian companies like BlueScope would also do well to remind Trump of its billions in assets in the US and the 3000 Americans it employs every year.