The UK would be right to prioritise an EU trade deal over the US

While many government ministers have talked up the prospects of negotiating a trade deal with the US, Sajid Javid has said that the government would first focus on securing a trade deal with the EU. The chancellor is right to do so.

Advocates of negotiating simultaneously with the US and the EU say the approach would put pressure on the EU in the Brexit negotiations, and ultimately help the UK to compensate for the loss of EU trade.

Neither argument stands up to scrutiny.

A quick political win looks like the only available option for the UK and the US in the short term

Announcing a quick deal would allow Boris Johnson to signal the seriousness of 'Global Britain' and let President Trump talk up his skills as a deal-maker.

But a quick deal would also be a narrow deal. There are barriers to doing something more substantive for both sides. For the UK, much of the public is hostile to the US’s big asks on agrifood and pharmaceuticals – and nor is business overly keen on the idea of a US deal. But it is hard to see how quick progress will be made if the UK isn't open to discussing at least one of these issues.

If the US wants a free trade agreement signed off before the current president’s term reaches it end, then it needs to move fast. President Trump would need to get a deal ratified by Congress, and a deal that doesn’t deliver on the demands of the most powerful lobbyist is deal that is going nowhere.

Trump might be able to avoid having to get Congress’s approval – which he can do if the deal is not a free trade agreement. If the UK can also avoid a big political backlash, then a fig-leaf deal – one which removes specific regulatory barriers in a few narrow areas – could yet work. But this is hardly likely to give the UK much leverage over the EU – or indeed compensate for failing to secure an EU trade deal.

The government may struggle to find the capacity to run another politically charged negotiation

The UK has appointed a number of key negotiators, but negotiating a trade a deal is a task which Whitehall has not faced for decades. Negotiations with the EU and the US will likely draw on the same set of expertise across departments, and it is far from clear whether the civil service has the expertise – and resources – to run two huge trade negotiations in parallel.

Regardless of the recruitment of negotiators, there is also a lack of clarity over whether the government knows what business actually wants, or needs, from a deal. Negotiators need more time to engage with business and understand its demands, rather than rushing headlong into negotiations.

And for a government that wants to make Brexit a non-story, extremely contentious negotiations with the US – negotiations that are inextricably linked to Brexit – are hardly likely to pass unnoticed. The government would be sensible to allow Whitehall to focus its resources on securing a deal which is less likely to find itself in the glare of the media.

Leveraging a US deal against the EU and vice versa is a dangerous tactic

One of the major arguments put forward for starting trade talks with the US is that it will put pressure on the EU. The EU and the US are competing to define the rules of trade that other countries abide by, and the EU has an interest in ensuring that a UK–US deal does not pull the UK too far outside its orbit.

But opening up a full-scale negotiation with the US at the same time as the EU could actually end up increasing the pressure on the UK. The UK is like a customer that must choose between two incompatible set-menus. It gets a choice, but it doesn’t get to shape the menu. And the EU also knows that the economic incentives of a US deal will not compensate for the loss of access to its market. It is also well aware that no deal with the US is the status quo for the UK; no deal with the EU, on the other hand, is new territory.

Securing a deal with the US will not be an easy negotiation. It will take time, and it will involve difficult choices and, perhaps, painful compromises. The UK should focus first on getting the relationship it wants with the EU.