Arancha González Laya: The wounded heart of multilateralism in the face of Trump's trade threat

In recent days, the name Arancha González Laya has been making waves again in political and economic circles. And for good reason: the former Spanish Foreign Minister has become one of the most lucid voices deciphering the perfect storm brewing in global trade. As Donald Trump threatens a new tariff front that would directly hit Spain and the rest of Europe, Laya's sharp analysis—with one foot in academia and the other on the front line of international debate—makes you sit up and listen.

The fragility of multilateralism, according to Laya

Just a few weeks ago, at a prestigious international forum, Arancha González Laya was locked in a high-voltage debate with a top-tier political analyst. The title of the discussion said it all: "Saving multilateralism". Because if there's one thing Laya is clear about, it's that the rules-based international order—the one that took decades to build—is crumbling beneath our feet. This isn't a doomsday view; it's the stark realisation that with Trump back in the race for the White House, free trade as we knew it has entered its final phase. She puts it with painful clarity: we are witnessing the funeral of the World Trade Organization if Europeans don't get their act together and move as a bloc.

China's turn and the trap of deglobalisation

Another of Laya's recurring themes in her recent speeches—which ties directly into the lengthy title of a talked-about conference, "China's Turn in the Trade War"—is that the axis of the conflict is no longer just transatlantic. Beijing watches with millennia-old patience as the US ties itself in knots with its historical partners. For Laya, the real danger isn't the latest tariff, but falling into the trap of forced deglobalisation. She prefers to talk about "de-risking", but with nuance: it's not about disconnecting from China, but doing so without shooting ourselves in the foot. And that balance is precisely what European governments, including Spain's, just can't seem to find.

Wages, inflation, and the perfect storm

The debate wouldn't be complete without the social aspect. In her latest analysis, titled "De-Risking and Wageflation", Arancha González Laya issues a warning that should send a chill through Economics ministries: the combination of trade war and energy transition is sparking a bout of wageflation that's hard to manage. But don't get her wrong: Laya isn't against pay rises. What she points out is that if Trump's tariffs make Spanish exports—oil, wine, pork—more expensive, companies will have less room to move, and jobs will eventually suffer. Back here in Spain, the major unions have already cried foul, demanding a coordinated European response to protect employment—exactly what Laya has been preaching for weeks in international forums.

And where does Spain fit into all this?

While in Berlin some are pointing fingers at Merz's complicit silence in the face of Trump's bluster, here Laya's voice is rising as a necessary counterpoint. It's not the first time the former minister has reminded us that Spain, given its size and productive base, is among the countries that could suffer most from a trade war of this magnitude. But unlike many analyses that stop at complaining, she proposes a clear roadmap:

• Strengthen European strategic autonomy without falling into dumb protectionism.
• Diversify trading partners beyond the US and China, looking towards Latin America and Africa.
• Protect the most vulnerable sectors with active industrial policies, not just throwing subsidies down a black hole.

In short, when you listen to Arancha González Laya these days, you understand this is no ordinary trade crisis. It's a symptom of a changing era, and she, with that blend of governing experience and academic insight, has become the perfect interpreter of what's heading our way. Look at the photo accompanying this article: that half-smile, that look that seems to be calculating three moves ahead. It's the expression of someone who has seen this movie before and is trying to warn us that, this time, the ending could be different if we don't hurry up and rewrite the script.