Christian Briggs Examines How Economic Leverage Is Reshaping U.S. Negotiations With Canada, China and Iran

Economist joins NTD News to discuss Canada’s retaliatory tariffs, U.S.

SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO, September 2, 2026 /EINPresswire.com/ -- Christian Briggs Examines How Economic Leverage Is Reshaping U.S. Negotiations With Canada, China and Iran

Economist joins NTD News to discuss Canada’s retaliatory tariffs, U.S. trade strategy and why sanctions, energy and market access are becoming critical tools of geopolitical negotiation

Economist and Hard Asset Management CEO Christian Briggs joined NTD News to examine the escalating tariff dispute between the United States and Canada and explain why he believes the confrontation should be viewed less as a traditional trade war and more as a high-stakes negotiation over economic leverage.

Canada has responded to new U.S. tariffs with approximately $20 billion in retaliatory measures on American goods, escalating tensions between two of the world’s most closely connected trading partners.

During the interview, Briggs argued that Canada enters the dispute from a fundamentally different economic position because of the substantial difference in scale between the U.S. and Canadian economies.

While both countries could experience economic consequences from a prolonged dispute, Briggs said Canada may have more to lose if negotiations remain stalled.

His broader point: tariffs are not necessarily the end objective.

In Briggs’s view, President Donald Trump is using tariffs as a negotiating instrument designed to pressure trading partners toward more reciprocal agreements.

Tariffs as a Negotiating Tool

Briggs pointed to existing Canadian trade protections, including tariffs and quota restrictions affecting certain American agricultural products such as dairy, as part of the administration’s argument that the trading relationship should become more reciprocal.

Rather than interpreting the latest measures solely as an attempt to punish Canada, Briggs said they should also be viewed as leverage.

The question, he explained, is whether economic pressure ultimately brings both governments back to the negotiating table.

Canada has announced retaliatory measures of its own, along with financial support intended to assist workers and industries affected by the dispute.

Briggs said such assistance could provide temporary relief, but government subsidies cannot replace a sustainable long-term trading relationship between the two countries.

His conclusion was straightforward: eventually, Washington and Ottawa need to make a deal.

The Canadian Dollar Adds Another Risk

Briggs also highlighted the Canadian dollar as a potential source of additional economic pressure.

A weaker currency can make a country’s exports more competitive internationally, but that advantage comes with a significant tradeoff.

When the Canadian dollar loses value, imported goods become more expensive for Canadian consumers and businesses, potentially creating additional inflationary pressure.

That becomes particularly important when industries depend on imported materials, equipment, energy or consumer products priced in stronger foreign currencies.

Briggs warned that a prolonged trade dispute accompanied by currency weakness could therefore place Canadian policymakers in a difficult position: attempting to support domestic industries while simultaneously managing higher costs for consumers.

For that reason, he believes Canada has a strong economic incentive to ultimately reach an agreement with the United States rather than allow the confrontation to continue indefinitely.

From Canada to Iran and China

The NTD News conversation then shifted from North American trade to a much larger geopolitical question: how the United States can use economic leverage against Iran when China remains one of Tehran’s most important economic partners and oil customers.

As Washington increases financial pressure on Iran, Briggs was asked whether meaningful sanctions could also be imposed on Chinese entities involved in purchasing Iranian oil or supporting Tehran economically.

Briggs said additional sanctions are possible, but suggested President Trump may prefer direct discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping before significantly escalating economic pressure on Beijing.

That approach, Briggs argued, would be consistent with a broader negotiating strategy in which economic pressure creates leverage but diplomacy remains the intended path toward resolution.
The challenge is substantially greater with China than with smaller economies.

China is one of the world’s largest economies, a major trading partner of the United States and an important participant in global manufacturing, finance and energy markets.

Sanctions aimed at Chinese entities therefore carry potential consequences far beyond the immediate U.S.–Iran relationship.

Iran’s Oil Lifeline

Energy remains central to the pressure campaign against Tehran.

Oil exports provide Iran with an important source of revenue, and China has historically been one of the most significant buyers of Iranian crude.

Restricting that trade can reduce Tehran’s access to foreign currency and increase economic pressure on the Iranian government.

Briggs said the effectiveness of that strategy depends heavily on whether countries purchasing Iranian energy believe continued transactions are worth the potential financial and diplomatic consequences.

This is where U.S. leverage over access to markets, financial institutions and trade relationships becomes particularly important.

The objective, according to Briggs’s analysis, is not necessarily to isolate every country doing business with Iran simultaneously.

Instead, Washington can attempt to increase the economic cost of supporting Tehran until negotiations become more attractive than continued confrontation.

Briggs Sees Iran Signaling a Desire to Negotiate

Briggs also discussed recent statements from Iranian officials expressing an interest in negotiations.

He interpreted those comments as a possible indication that economic and geopolitical pressure is beginning to affect Tehran’s calculations.

Rather than viewing calls for negotiations as evidence that the underlying conflict has been resolved, Briggs said they may indicate that Iranian leaders increasingly recognize the cost of continued isolation and confrontation.

That creates an opportunity for diplomacy—if both sides can identify terms they are willing to accept.

The same principle runs throughout Briggs’s analysis of Canada, China and Iran:

economic pressure is most useful when it ultimately creates leverage at the negotiating table.

The Strait of Hormuz Raises the Stakes

The discussion also touched on the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most strategically important energy corridors.

Disruptions involving the strait can affect not only Iran but oil markets, shipping, inflation and economic conditions around the world.

That makes energy policy inseparable from the broader geopolitical negotiations involving Iran and China.

Briggs argued that policymakers must therefore weigh the benefits of economic pressure against the potential consequences for global energy markets.

Sanctions may constrain an adversary, but energy disruptions can also increase costs for consumers and businesses far beyond the countries directly involved.

The challenge for Washington is applying enough pressure to create negotiating leverage without unnecessarily producing broader economic instability.

Economic Power as a Foreign-Policy Tool

For Briggs, the common thread connecting the U.S.–Canada tariff dispute, sanctions on Iran, China’s energy relationship with Tehran and the Strait of Hormuz is the growing use of economic power as a geopolitical tool.

Tariffs, sanctions, market access, currency pressure and energy policy can influence government behavior without relying exclusively on military force.

But Briggs emphasized that economic pressure should have a strategic objective.

In the case of Canada, that objective would be a more reciprocal trade agreement.

With Iran, the goal would be to create sufficient pressure to encourage a negotiated settlement.

And with China, Washington must balance the ability to impose economic consequences against the importance of maintaining enough communication to negotiate on larger strategic issues.

The next phase of several major international confrontations, Briggs suggested, may therefore depend less on what happens on a battlefield and more on what happens across a negotiating table.

The full NTD News interview featuring Christian Briggs is available now on YouTube.

Watch the full interview:
https://youtu.be/IhZ_9Iu8K6c

On the Record with Christian Briggs

On the Record with Christian Briggs brings together thought leaders and economists to examine financial issues shaping our era. Each episode provides insights on economic trends and the importance of tangible assets for wealth preservation.

About Christian Briggs

Christian Briggs is a financial commentator, economist, and hard asset specialist who has advised members of Congress and the U.S. Senate on issues involving monetary policy, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), hard assets, and global financial systems. As CEO of Hard Asset Management and a veteran of financial markets since 1987, Briggs brings decades of experience analyzing the intersection of economics, geopolitics, emerging financial technologies, and wealth preservation strategies.

Disclaimer: The content presented is for informational and entertainment purposes only and should not be construed as professional financial, investment, legal, tax, or political advice. Any reliance you place on information from this episode is strictly at your own risk. Information presented in this episode reflects conditions and knowledge as of the date of recording. Circumstances, facts, laws, regulations, and market conditions may change after the episode is produced. The host is not under any obligation to update or correct information after publication. This episode may contain strong opinions, controversial viewpoints, or content that some viewers may find objectionable. The Show, its host, guests, and affiliates make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, or suitability of the information contained in this episode. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk.

Christian Briggs
BMC HAM
+1 844-426-4653
email us here
Visit us on social media:
Facebook
YouTube
X