The U.S. Tariff Gamble: Disrupting Trade, Stability, and the Global Order
- Gideon Fadiran
- Apr 12
- 4 min read
Updated: 5 days ago
The United States has introduced major new tariffs, including a 145% rate on Chinese goods, raising concerns around the world. The decision has led to pushback from other countries, market uncertainty, and questions about what the U.S. is really trying to achieve. This isn’t just another trade policy, rather it could mark a shift toward using tariffs as a tool of political influence rather than economic strategy.
A Real Concern for the Economy or Just a Show of Power?
As the tariff escalation unfolds, one must ask: Was China the real target all along? And if so, is this trade war about protecting the U.S. economy or demonstrating dominance on the world stage?
The latest U.S. actions suggest less concern for long-term economic planning and more about projecting strength. Immediate implementation, lack of institutional preparedness, and an absence of clear coordination signal a political maneuver rather than a strategic trade doctrine.
This question becomes even more relevant when one considers that the U.S. has offered a 90-day tariff pause for over 75 countries, slashing reciprocal tariffs to just 10%, a number with no clear mathematical or economic rationale. If there’s no model justifying this rate, is it merely a symbolic gesture to isolate China?
Tariff Escalation Timeline
Could this be an attempt not just to confront China, but to disrupt and destabilize the global trade model that China thrives in?
This is no longer just economic policy. It’s power play, and the world is watching.
China Holds the Line
In a statement today, China clarified that it sees no value in increasing tariffs further. With the current rate now set at 125%, to take effect on April 12, 2025, Chinese authorities emphasized that U.S. goods are already effectively priced out of competitiveness. This signals a strategic pause, not a concession, as China believes the current tariff level is sufficient to exert economic pressure.
Rather than being cowed by the latest escalation, China appears unfazed. In recent weeks, it had already raised its tariffs on U.S. goods to 125% (up from 84%), and now seems more resolved than ever to resist American trade aggression.
This new dynamic raises a critical question: Does China no longer fear U.S. economic retaliation?
With its massive internal market, robust export network, and strengthened ties across Asia, Africa, and Europe, China may now feel confident enough to weather — or even counter — American pressure. The age of unilateral U.S. dominance in trade may be waning.
EU Hesitates: From Retaliation to Restraint
In a bold signal of its own, the European Union announced a 25% tariff on a wide array of U.S. products. Initially framed as retaliation, this move was unexpectedly reversed just a day later. The EU announced it would pause implementation of the 25% tariffs in a bid to avoid further escalation with Washington, opting instead to pursue negotiations.
This backtracking has sparked debate: Is the EU signaling caution or fear?
Unlike China, which has responded with confidence and firm countermeasures, the EU seems more cautious in its approach. While Beijing doubled down, Brussels stepped back. This contrast highlights differing levels of economic resilience and political risk tolerance. For the EU, avoiding internal disruption may outweigh the appeal of a bold trade response. Some analysts attribute this to the EU’s fundamentally different structure: a social system where businesses, prices, and households are heavily protected by state mechanisms. In such a system, economic shocks are politically dangerous, and diplomacy is often favored over confrontation.
Others suggest that the EU remains reluctant to fracture economic ties with the U.S. in an environment already strained by war, inflation, and energy insecurity.
This development raises an uncomfortable truth: Even global players must now weigh retaliation against political risk and not all are equally prepared to confront the U.S. head-on.
Where is the WTO?
As trade tensions boil over, one glaring absence is that of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Once regarded as the backbone of international trade governance, the WTO has become increasingly sidelined, with its dispute resolution system weakened and its influence diminished. The escalation has unfolded unilaterally and bilaterally, with retaliation and policy shock dominating the landscape.
This raises a sobering question: Has the WTO become obsolete in the new era of power-based trade relations?
Globalization Has Changed the Balance of Power
One underlying factor in all of this is the globalization of supply chains. Countries that once depended heavily on American imports or markets now have diversified options, sourcing materials and goods from Asia, South America, or even intra-regional partners.
But perhaps more critically, the world is now confronting the consequences of a tariff war against the world’s largest exporter.
The U.S. decision to impose a 145% tariff on such a vital trade hub will not just affect American and Chinese businesses, it will likely send shockwaves through supply networks worldwide.
From raw materials to advanced electronics, China is deeply woven into global production and distribution systems. The ripple effects may disrupt pricing, timelines, inventory levels, and strategic planning across industries and continents.
This is not just a bilateral clash, it’s a systemic jolt to the global economy.
The fear of U.S. trade dominance is evaporating: Governments are not only retaliating but doing so without hesitation. Whether it’s China doubling down, the EU imposing strategic countermeasures, or developing countries joining regional blocs, global trade is reorganizing at a fast pace.
The Future of Global Trade
The world is responding not just to tariffs, but to what they represent: a breakdown in predictability, and a loss of faith in U.S. leadership on trade.
What’s clear is that this is no longer a trade dispute — it’s a sign of a wider shift in the global order. Countries are adapting, forming new alliances, and reassessing their dependence on the U.S. in trade. What comes next may not be a return to stability — but a very different kind of global economy.
Relating articles:
コメント