US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has defended President Donald Trump's sweeping tariff strategy, asserting that it has significantly strengthened Washington's negotiating hand with major trading partners — including India — and accelerated the administration's push to revive American manufacturing. Greer made the remarks in an interview published by The New York Times on 21 July.

Greer's Core Argument

Greer said the administration moved aggressively on tariffs because it viewed America's widening trade deficit as an economic emergency demanding decisive action. He argued that broad-based tariffs had given Washington the leverage to negotiate new trade arrangements with multiple partners.

'They are. Yeah. I think we've been wildly successful,' Greer said when asked whether the tariff policy was working. 'Whenever you're trying to change policy in a big way and you're upending special interests or corporate interests, people are going to come back and try to fight that. They want the status quo. We don't want the status quo.'

Trade Deals Cited as Evidence

According to the interview, Greer pointed to trade negotiations with the United Kingdom, the European Union, Indonesia, India, and Japan as evidence that the tariff-first approach was producing tangible diplomatic results. He characterised these engagements as direct outcomes of the administration's willingness to impose sweeping duties.

Notably, the claim comes even as economists and business groups have criticised the tariff programme for raising consumer prices and disrupting global supply chains — concerns Greer dismissed as resistance from entrenched corporate interests.

Supreme Court Ruling and Legal Pushback

The US trade chief acknowledged that the Supreme Court had struck down a significant portion of the administration's tariff programme, but said he had no regrets. 'We're always going to get sued,' Greer said. 'There's always going to be people who are trying to make a buck on the back of the American worker, and they're always going to want to sue to maintain their business model.'

He said the administration was already exploring alternative legal authorities to preserve its trade agenda, signalling that the policy direction would not change despite the judicial setback.

What the Administration Claims to Have Achieved

'At the end of the day, we are winning in changing the trade policy. We're winning in getting the trade deficit down. We're winning in reshoring. We're winning in wages. We're winning on all these things. So I'm happy with where we are and where we're going,' Greer said.

He added that the strategy was less about confronting specific countries and more about rebalancing terms of trade in America's favour. 'It does mean, to the extent we have to take measures in other countries, we will. But it's less that we're anti any particular country and more we're just pro-America,' he said.

Long-Term Outlook

Rejecting criticism that the tariff approach had become politically unsustainable, Greer argued it should be judged over a longer horizon. He said the administration was already observing early signs of increased factory investment, higher manufacturing wages, and improving industrial productivity — though independent verification of these claims remains limited. 'The trade policy is really about wages and protecting manufacturing and agricultural production. And I think that the American people are going to see this over time,' he said.

With the US-India trade relationship under active renegotiation, Greer's remarks signal that Washington intends to maintain tariff pressure as a core bargaining tool in the months ahead.