Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : Donald Trump’s return to aggressive protectionism—through sweeping tariffs on allies and rivals alike—has ignited what can only be described as a global trade war, or more aptly, a form of “tariff terrorism.” Cloaked in the rhetoric of “America First,” these economic policies were touted as the tools that would restore American greatness. Instead, they have exposed the diminishing grip of U.S. hegemony and accelerated the emergence of a multipolar world where unilateralism no longer commands submission.
China’s response to Trump’s tariffs is equally telling. Initially targeted with punitive duties reaching 145% on certain goods, Beijing did not fold. Instead, it recalibrated. By diversifying its trade relationships and reducing reliance on the U.S. market—now only accounting for 12% of China’s total exports—China insulated itself from American economic warfare. State propaganda turned Trump into a laughingstock, nicknaming him “Tariff Grandpa” and mocking U.S. inflation, while Chinese consumers embraced patriotic boycotts and switched from iPhones to Huawei.
More importantly, China didn’t come begging. Instead, it issued its own ultimatum: all tariffs must be removed, ab initio, or there will be no negotiations. Trump’s boast that President Xi would come “running on his knees” proved a fantasy. The tables have turned. Today, Trump’s team is the one chasing a deal while China plays hardball with its own set of strategic levers—like restricting rare earth exports vital to U.S. tech and defense.
Trump’s tariff strategy was initially framed as a corrective measure against trade deficits and so-called unfair practices, especially targeting China. But soon, the net widened to include America’s closest allies—Canada, Mexico, and the European Union. Steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada, for example, struck at the heart of a nation that sends 75% of its exports to the U.S., risking over 2.5 million jobs and nearly 20% of its GDP. To many Canadians, this was akin to a trusted firefighter torching their home and then demanding they hand over the deed for the promise of rebuilding.
Canada, once America’s most dependable partner, struck back with retaliatory tariffs on $155 billion worth of U.S. goods—from coffee and cars to ketchup and orange juice. Simultaneously, consumer prices in the U.S. rose due to higher import costs, pushing inflation up and GDP growth down. According to independent economic analyses, Trump’s tariffs contributed to a nearly 3% hit on U.S. GDP and stoked a persistent inflationary trend. The Yale Budget Lab estimated that his blanket tariff regime lifted the effective U.S. tariff rate to its highest level since 1943—an astounding shift in a matter of months.
Yet, Trump insists these measures are about reciprocity. “Other nations have taken advantage of us,” he says. But what is rarely acknowledged is that the U.S. has enjoyed an 80-year advantage since it established the dollar as the world’s reserve currency post-WWII. That singular privilege has allowed it to run deficits others could not afford. Trump’s zero-sum worldview ignores this history, bulldozing through nuanced economic relationships in favor of brute-force diplomacy.
What he and his acolytes misunderstand is that trust—not fear—is the bedrock of global trade. When the U.S. unilaterally imposes tariffs on allies and tears up treaties like the USMCA, it shatters that trust. Trump has turned America’s traditional leadership role into a transactional, coercive enterprise. As a result, even America’s friends are turning elsewhere. In 2024, China overtook the U.S. in trade volume with the European Union—€856 billion versus €822 billion—a symbolic but significant shift in global allegiances.
Meanwhile, Europe, another target of Trump’s scorn, has closed ranks. His attacks on NATO, his support for authoritarian-leaning figures like Viktor Orbán, and his lecturing of EU leaders by political novices like JD Vance have unified the continent in resistance. They are no longer willing to accept the U.S. as the sole arbiter of global order. What Trump saw as leverage turned into alienation. A once-cohesive transatlantic alliance now navigates its future with less dependence on Washington.
This unraveling of global goodwill is compounded by economic damage at home. Tariffs don’t make America stronger—they hurt American families and businesses. One importer, who once paid $26,000 in annual tariffs, now faces a $346,000 bill due to the new 104% tariff on Chinese goods. Small manufacturers have seen input costs skyrocket. And while some champions of re-industrialization argue for building local supply chains, the short-term impact is crushing. Trump’s protectionism may eventually lead to a more roboticized, domestic manufacturing base—but at what social and economic cost?
Far from creating a golden age, Trump’s trade policies are inviting stagflation—a toxic combination of stagnant growth and rising prices. This chaos has eroded America’s standing, both economically and diplomatically. At a time when coordinated responses to climate change, AI governance, and global debt crises are desperately needed, Trump’s America is retreating into isolationism and infighting.
The irony is brutal. The tariffs meant to punish foreign adversaries have instead punished domestic consumers. The trade wars meant to lower deficits have likely widened them. The vision of renewed American strength has manifested as global disillusionment. And the promise to bring adversaries to heel has revealed an unsettling truth: the world is no longer America’s to command.
What remains now is the wreckage of broken agreements, the fraying of alliances, and the slow but steady realization that the 21st century will not be defined by a single superpower. The multipolar world has arrived—with China, the EU, and even smaller economies like Canada standing their ground. America still matters, immensely so, but it must lead by example, not coercion. Trump’s tariffs have done what no global coalition could achieve: they’ve exposed the limits of American power.
And so, as the dust settles on Trump’s tariff regime, one fact becomes clear—economic nationalism may win elections, but it rarely wins wars.

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : My reading of China has always been of a country that is sagacious, forgiving and accomodating—an entity flowing naturally through history, shaped by the burden and blessing of over 5,000 years of civilizational legacy. China has long carried the unique distinction of never being an occupying force in the historical sense, never driven by the imperial ambition to rule the world. Despite holding immense power at different junctures in history, China refrained from conquest. Its Great Wall was built not as a launchpad for outward domination, but as a safeguard for inward integration. This tradition of strategic restraint and internal focus has morphed into the philosophical foundation of President Xi Jinping’s economic and diplomatic agenda in the 21st century.
China’s foreign policy, even amid rising global tensions, has maintained its emphasis on win-win cooperation, mutual growth, and infrastructural diplomacy. It does not promote regime change, nor does it meddle in the internal politics of other nations. China’s strength lies in its ability to uplift weaker economies through massive infrastructure projects, energy support, port development, and institutional capacity-building. These efforts are not intended to dominate but to elevate. That is the spirit of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), offering struggling nations an alternative model of growth without conditionalities that mirror neo-colonialism.
In contrast, the Trump administration’s aggressive “America First” policy has been marked by an unrelenting tariff war, often in violation of international norms, bilateral treaties, and the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO). These tariffs were not just protectionist; they were unilateral assaults on the interconnected architecture of the global economy. By weaponizing tariffs, Trump sought to coerce trading partners and reconfigure supply chains through brute economic power. However, in doing so, the administration not only antagonized allies and adversaries alike but also disrupted global trade balances, supply chains, and investor confidence.
The global economy is an ecosystem. If one part of it is harmed, the ripple effects are felt across continents. In this context, the Trump tariffs didn’t just target China—they undermined the very structure of global trade and collaboration. The United States, which once championed free trade, suddenly became its greatest disruptor. This led to global uncertainty, inflation in various sectors, and rising consumer prices within the United States itself.
In response to this unprecedented tariff regime, China issued its strongest economic and diplomatic rebuttal to date. Breaking from its traditional quiet diplomacy, Beijing made it unequivocally clear that it would not succumb to unilateral economic bullying. For the first time, Chinese officials accused the United States of distorting international trade norms and harming global economic recovery.
China argued that the United States had, in fact, been the largest beneficiary of globalization. With a massive 25% share in world trade, the U.S. economic dominance was built on the very trade practices it was now dismantling. China emphasized that it did not initiate the trade war but would not hesitate to defend its interests. It pledged to open up its economy further, reduce tariffs, and increase imports—not out of compulsion, but to demonstrate its commitment to global cooperation. This stands in sharp contrast to the inward-looking, protectionist tendencies of the Trump administration.
China’s response was calm but resolute. It promised to uphold the principles of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits. It reaffirmed its belief in genuine multilateralism, rejecting all forms of unilateralism and economic coercion. China stood firmly in support of the international system with the United Nations at its core and the multilateral trading system with the WTO at its foundation.
China’s declaration also emphasized that the vast majority of nations still believed in fairness, justice, and the rule of international law. These countries, it argued, would eventually stand on the right side of history—not because of allegiance to any one superpower, but because equity must triumph over hegemony.
Trump, meanwhile, sought to justify the economic fallout from his tariff blitzkrieg by promising future investments totaling $7 trillion. However, even he admitted that the U.S. stock market had lost nearly $6 trillion in value within days. While the theoretical future investment may or may not materialize over four to five years, the immediate damage was undeniable. The American consumer bore the brunt of the tariffs, with increased prices on everything from electronics to household goods.
What Trump failed to recognize—or perhaps chose to ignore—is that tariffs on imports function as a hidden tax on American citizens. When tariffs are levied on goods from China or any other country, U.S. importers pass those costs onto retailers, who in turn pass them onto consumers. So, while the U.S. Treasury may gain in the short term from tariff revenues, it is ultimately the American people who pay the price.
This disconnect between political rhetoric and economic reality triggered public backlash. Demonstrations erupted across the United States, not just from ideological opponents of Trump but from ordinary citizens suffering from inflation and job insecurity. The symbols associated with Trump’s protectionist agenda—banners, flags, and campaign props—became the targets of public outrage, a visible expression of disillusionment with failed promises and mounting hardship.
The damage was not just economic; it was reputational. America’s standing as a leader of the free world, a promoter of open markets and democratic values, was called into question. The aggressive imposition of tariffs on allies and adversaries alike sent a message that America was retreating from the world stage, abandoning its commitments, and undermining its credibility.
What is the via media in this escalating trade conflict? The answer lies in dialogue, cooperation, and mutual respect. Instead of unilaterally imposing tariffs, the United States must return to the table and engage its partners through negotiation, evidence-based studies, and inclusive policy-making. Any trade policy that causes disproportionate harm to a segment of the global population—be it American or foreign—is inherently flawed.
Tariffs should be the last resort, not the first weapon of choice. They must be evaluated based on who truly benefits and who bears the cost. If the people of both nations stand to gain, then policy adjustments may be justified. But if tariffs disproportionately hurt consumers, strain diplomatic ties, and fracture global supply chains, then they are not only counterproductive but dangerous.
The world today demands cooperation over confrontation. It requires strategic empathy rather than economic nationalism. China’s model of infrastructure-led diplomacy and economic integration may not be perfect, but it offers an alternative vision to brute-force protectionism. A world driven by consultation and shared prosperity is far more stable than one governed by unilateral decrees and economic coercion.
The battle between tariff wars and trade cooperation is not just a contest of policies—it is a contest of visions. The world must choose between retreating into silos or building bridges across continents. In this defining moment, China’s calm and strategic response to Trump’s aggressive tariffs may well mark a turning point in the global order.
It is a call for equity—not hegemony.

American companies looking to sell into the huge Chinese market have just taken a big hit. A 34% price increase on all US goods entering the country will knock some out of here altogether.

This is especially bad for US agricultural producers. They already had 10 or 15% tariffs on their produce entering China, in response to the last round of Trump tariffs. Now, if you add 34% on top of that, it is probably pricing most of them out.

Beijing doesn’t seem too worried about looking elsewhere for more chicken, pork and sorghum and – at the same time – it knows it is whacking the US president right in his heartland.

Globally, all of this has analysts worried.

The problem is that supply chains have become so international, components in any given product could be sourced from all corners of the planet.

So, when the ripples of economic distress start spreading from country to country, it could have potentially catastrophic consequences for all trade.

• Live updates: Markets and reaction to Trump tariffs
• Full list: See all Trump tariffs by country
• Watch: Why Trump’s tariffs aren’t really reciprocal

Most concerning is that the world’s two greatest economies are now at each other’s throats with no indication that either is preparing to backdown.

Just take the timing of Beijing’s announcement.

The Chinese government revealed its promised “resolute countermeasures” to Trump’s latest tariffs in a written statement from the finance ministry at 18:00 local time (10:00 GMT), on a Friday night, which is also a public holiday.

The timing could mean several things.

1. It wanted to somewhat bury the news at home, so as to not spook people too much.

2. It simply made the announcement as soon as its own calibrations had been finalised.

3. Beijing had given up on the hope of using the small window it had before Trump’s 54% tariffs on Chinese goods took effect next week to do a deal. So, the government just decided to let it rip.

If it is the last of these reasons, that is pretty bleak news for the global economy because it could mean that a settlement between the world’s superpowers could be harder to reach than many had expected.

Another indicator of President Xi’s attitude towards President Trump’s tariffs can be seen by what he was doing when they were announced.

Elsewhere, governments may have been glued to the television, hoping to avoid the worst from Washington.

Not here.

Xi and the six other members of the Politburo Standing Committee were out planting trees to draw attention to the need to counter deforestation.

It presented a kind of calmness in the face of Trump, giving off a vibe along the lines of: do your best Washington, this is China and we’re not interested in your nonsense.

There is still room for the US and China to cut some sort of deal, but the rhetoric does not seem to be heading that way.

Another possible path is for China to increase its trade with other countries – including western nations once seen as close allies of the US – and for these new routes to essentially cut America out of the loop.

Again, this would hurt not only US companies but also US consumers who will already be paying higher prices thanks to Trump’s tariffs.

Taken From BBC News

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4grlzegewno