Greer Calls for Fresh Architecture in Global Trade at G20 Ministerial

· Event: Opening remarks at G20 Trade Ministerial, Milwaukee, Sept 30, 2026.

· Venue Significance: Pfister Hotel, historic site of JFK’s 1959 speech on competitiveness.

· Historical Parallel: Kennedy’s warning on declining production and “years of drift” echoed today.

· Key Challenges Highlighted:

o Macroeconomic imbalances.

o Structural excess capacity.

o Forced labor.

o Economic coercion.

· U.S. Actions:

o Use of tariffs and bilateral deals to reduce trade deficit.

o Strengthening resilient supply chains.

o Promoting fairness, reciprocity, balance in trade.

· Four Workstreams for G20:

1. Weaponization of food.

2. Structural excess capacity & production.

3. Most-Favored-Nation principle.

4. Forced labor in supply chains.

· Architectural Metaphor:

o Old trade “blueprints” (GATT/WTO) no longer fit 21st century needs.

o Lessons from architects (Lina Bo Bardi, Wang Shu, Frank Lloyd Wright) → adapt, repurpose, innovate.

· Closing Message:

o Build a new trading system rooted in resilience, fairness, and community.

o Milwaukee as symbolic hub of production and adaptation.

[ABS News Service/01.10.2026]

As Prepared for Delivery on September 30, 2026

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Good afternoon ministers and delegates. I would like to officially welcome you to Milwaukee for the G20 Trade Ministerial meeting.

Milwaukee is the “Machine Shop of the World,” a center for innovation and services, and is located within a key agricultural state. The city is emblematic of the type of economy the United States wants to encourage—one oriented towards production, and all that comes with it.

It is special that we are able to convene in the Pfister Hotel. First opened in 1893, the Pfister was at the cutting edge of engineering and design, with a fireproof construction, self-produced electricity, and even individual thermostats in every room. Over its 130-year life, the Pfister has borne witness to its share of historical events and important gatherings.

I’d like to tell you about one of them.

In November 1959, John F. Kennedy—then a young senator embarking on his presidential campaign—gave a major policy address in this very ballroom. Kennedy decried the loss of American competitiveness: declining production of steel, machinery, tools, energy, and agricultural products. He reminded his listeners about the importance of technological innovation and industrial investment. He worried about the erosion of productive capacity in critical sectors and the consequences of expanding non-market policies and practices.

That was 67 years ago. But unfortunately, those elements of his speech are very relevant today. 

The speech was entitled “The Years the Locusts Have Eaten.” That, itself, is a reference to a quote by Winston Churchill about the dithering and failure to take strong policy actions in the lead up to World War II.

This same framing applies to the global trading system today. To quote Kennedy’s remarks: slavish fidelity to multilateral rules has resulted in “years of drift, of falling behind, of postponing decision.”

For more than a decade, the global economy has been beset by macroeconomic imbalances, structural excess capacity and production, forced labor, and economic coercion. And yet, the response by the world’s economies has been mostly talk.

Consider that it was back in 2016 that the leaders of all our countries committed at the G20 to address excess industrial capacity. It has been ten years—excess industrial capacity is an even greater distortion in the global economy now than it was then.  

This is why, starting last year, the United States took action, using a combination of tariffs and bilateral deals to reduce our trade deficit, make resilient our supply chains, and bring fairness, reciprocity, and balance to the global economy.

This week, we gather to discuss these pressing issues for the trading system. Typically, and too often, when difficult questions and topics arise in the G20, many around the room suggest that such discussions belong elsewhere. That they should take place in Geneva at the WTO. But Geneva is just another city on a lake. And so is Milwaukee. So, let’s talk candidly and constructively here.  

To this end, there are four workstreams the U.S. Presidency has focused on over the course of the year: the weaponization of food, structural excess capacity and production, the Most-Favored-Nation principle, and forced labor in global supply chains. I will discuss each in turn.

First, the weaponization of food. Coercive trade actions involving food, agricultural products, and agricultural inputs pose serious consequences for economies and the people in them.

Second, structural excess capacity and production. When non-market policies and practices allow production to expand far beyond domestic demand, the consequences spill across borders. Excess production flows into global markets, putting pressure on producers and workers elsewhere.

Third, MFN treatment. Many consider MFN to be the cornerstone of the global trading system. But even a cornerstone should be examined from time to time to ensure it is still supporting the structure we need. The MFN principle, particularly when applied unconditionally, constrains economies’ ability to effectively respond to distortive policies and adapt to changing market conditions.

Finally, forced labor. First and foremost a humanitarian issue, but also a trade issue. Goods made with forced labor enter markets with an artificial price advantage, creating unfair competitive conditions for workers and businesses, while eroding trust in the fairness of the global trading system.

Over the next two days, we will discuss these issues in depth and it is my intent that we leave Milwaukee with a clearer sense of urgency and a recognition of the need for action.

Earlier today, I am pleased most of you joined the field trip to the production facility where Rockwell Automation makes industrial machines—this is the kind of work and economic activity the United States leads in and wants more of. I believe it is important to show, in tangible terms, what kind of economy the Trump Administration is working to create and how the fruits of a balanced, fair, and reciprocal trading system can benefit each one of our economies.

Here in Milwaukee, we gather as possible architects of a new international economic order. The topics we will talk about at our meetings—weaponization of food, structural excess capacity and production, MFN and forced labor—are ongoing challenges, the solutions to which expose the overall problem: we are trying to meet 21st century challenges with an architecture designed for another era.

So what should we do when the original blueprint—in this case the ideas of 1947 or 1995—no longer meet our needs?

Actual architects offer us useful lessons.

Brazilian architect Lina Bo Bardi confronted a version of that question when she transformed an abandoned steel-drum factory in Sao Paulo into one of Brazil’s most celebrated cultural centers. Chinese architect Wang Shu is another. He is known for salvaging bricks, tiles, and other materials from demolished traditional buildings and repurposing them for modern structures.

Building for the future does not require us to discard everything we inherited from the past. But neither does it require us to leave old ideas unchanged. It is my hope that in our discussions everyone in this room will bring fresh looks to these long-standing problems.

Now, I recognize that discussions we have here will not resolve every issue by the time we all attend the reception at the Harley Davidson Museum tomorrow night. Just as Antonio Gaudi started the ongoing work to build the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona in 1883, work to establish a trading system that is more balanced and fair will continue long after our tenures in office—maybe except for Piyush who is trade minister for life! Remember, it was almost 50 years from the start of the GATT to the creation of the WTO.

In closing, I’ll invoke one last architect, Wisconsin native Frank Lloyd Wright.

Wright, and his Prairie School, believed that architecture should evoke place, emphasize community, build a connection to the past, and pay respect to the future. These are the same attributes that motivate U.S. economic and trade policy today. We want our families and communities to be strong, resilient, and prosperous. To do that, we are looking to our history for policy ideas and inspiration. And we will use that to set a course for the future.

We want to work with each of you to build a new trading system that can achieve that end for the United States, as well as all of your countries. I can think of no better place to have those conversations than at the G20 Trade Ministerial here in Milwaukee—a city that has spent more than a century building, making, and adapting to change.

I wish every delegation a productive time here in Wisconsin, and I look forward to our discussions today and tomorrow. Thank you.