Trump’s global war on trade

By: Azhar Azam

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared in "Express Tribune":
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2030365/6-trumps-global-war-trade/?fbclid=IwAR2pn74Q21UCaaXL0WcqxpFszBFhoxASXtB85crxOMoVMdqZufSWqoaq0xQ

The US President Donald Trump once again popped up on twitter with his impulsive and impatient brashness over China and announced to place 10% additional tariffs on the remaining $300 billion of Chinese goods starting September 1.

While conceding to have constructive talks between the US and Chinese officials about a future trade deal, Trump rationalized his tariff placement in a comeback to Beijing’s’ reluctance to buy US agriculture products in large quantities and to stopping fentanyl exports into the US.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying dubbed the act as a serious violation of the consensus reached by the Chinese and US Presidents at G-20 summit in Osaka and threatened to take necessary countermeasures. “We do not want a trade war, but we are not afraid of fighting one,” she added.

As Trump historically hasn’t retreated from his tariff misadventures, his provocative action would break the trade truce with China and would invite Beijing to take retaliatory measures. Hence, the tensed situation could dramatically escalate of trade war between the two largest economies of the world.

It is shocking that at a time while the China-US trade negotiations were sailing smoothly towards a decisive trade deal; Trump rushes down with a series of grating tweets. The hasty but expected proclamation elaborates that the kernel of Trump’s tariff strategy has a political backdrop.

Unwinding US military engagements in foreign countries such as in Afghanistan and trade deals with China, European Union (EU), Japan, and Mexico were Trump’s key promises to the American public during his previous presidential campaign.

But to date, he has only been able to accomplish a trade agreement with Mexico. As he has set September as a deadline to arrive on a peace deal with Afghan Taliban, he is desperate to strike trade pacts with China, Japan, and EU.

Therefore, Trump administration is actively pursuing to conclude a preliminary peace agreement with Taliban, to reach a limited trade agreement with Japan, and to partially settle trade disputes with EU, all later this month. While the new tariffs on Chinese goods would take effect from September 1, Trump craves to pull the plug on trade strains with Beijing quickly.

As US presidential canvassing would soon flare-up into a full-blown politicking, the looming peace and trade agreements would help Trump to effectively run and fast-track his 2020 presidential campaign with some achievements on his back. The success on these issues would definitely aid Trump to lodge into the White House for another term.

But the Trump’s political gambles meanwhile are hurting the US economy. As the fresher tariffs bill to penalize Chinese consumer electronics, clothing, shoes, and toys – American buyers of the Chinese goods have to be the definitive victims of Trump’s strident actions.

Trump’s prior 25% tariffs in May on $250 billion of Chinese goods were expected to have cost $500 per American household annually. If the new tariffs are implemented, it would cost American families roughly $700 and $900 per year respectively additionally, Oxford Economics told Newsweek. The Peterson Institute reckons it to be even higher, $1,270 per annum.

Retailers will be the prime target of novel tariffs, which will stumble when the new levies go into effect as they “disproportionately impact apparels, footwear, consumer electronics, and toys,” said Kate McShane of Goldman Sachs in a note to his clients.

Immediately after Trump’s tariffs announcement on imports from China, the shares of retailers on the Wall Street also tanked by 3%. The experts on the Wall Street are also unanimously united is that the Departmental Stores are exposed to substantial risks.

The US Chamber of Commerce has shown its disappointment on Trump’s tariffs hike as well. “Raising tariffs by ten percent on an additional $300 billion worth of imports from China will only inflict greater pain on American businesses, farmers, workers and consumers, and undermine an otherwise strong U.S. economy,” a statement of the organization’s executive vice president said on Thursday.

Stock markets the world over were also apprehensive of Trump’s abrupt decision to whack additional tariffs on Chinese goods. The London’s Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 100 Index or “Footsie”, French stock market, German Dax Index, and Nikkei all witnessed nervous investors’ reactions and sank sharply.

So Trump’s self-initiated trade war with China not only preys on his voters and haters equally but it would also put a squeeze on the US economy and GDP that would be subject to contract over flagging purchasing power of the townsfolk spread out across the country.

In addition, as a result of the US President’s irrational and unscrupulous trade war, the US multinational companies would be forced to shift their manufacturing plants in the nearby countries – thereby losing manufacturing jobs to the US, the crux of Trump’s campaign towards China.

Trump’s global war on trade might perhaps help him to regain a political win in the coming elections and another term as a US President but by the time, the damage to the US economy and the American buyers could have been irreversible.

A divided Europe is Trump’s soft target

By: Azhar Azam

Since Donald Trump’s ‘landslide’ win in November’s US presidential election, the European Union (EU) has been nervously bracing for a tidal wave that would shake the foundation of the transatlantic partnership and put the bloc’s unity to test.

Within a couple of months, Brussels hastily sealed a trade agreement with four Mercosur countries – Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay – carried out the biggest overhaul of the EU-Switzerland trade ties and concluded a stalled trade agreement with Mexico to showcase its strength to the tariff man.

In Europe, looming Trump’s tariffs are nudging Berlin and Paris closer, driving the French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz into demonstrating unity to the transactional US president who has lambasted the EU for treating the US "very, very badly" and will stack up obstacles for the European countries.

But the real challenge to the bloc stems from internal divisions. For instance, key European powers, France and Germany, differ on several issues ranging from deployment of troops to Ukraine and nuclear power to the South American deal. Unlike Berlin, Paris has wanted to send troops to the Ukraine war, is committed to build nuclear reactors and abhors the Mercosur accord, believing it would undermine the French farmers with a tide of cheap poultry and beef from Latin America.

Trump's return has forced them to exhibit cohesion; these deep-seated resentments toward each other could dominate their aspiration of forging a joint response against the US. Both Macron and Scholz have weakened politically at home, further dimming the hopes to respond to Trump with one-voice.

Macron is an ardent campaigner of European strategic autonomy; Berlin, irrespective of whoever becomes the next German chancellor, will cling to Atlanticism. Although the former advocates for a “united, strong and sovereign Europe” and later describes Trump as a “challenge,” divergent approaches of the two countries will continue to strain the Franco-German relationship, hampering the EU ability to construct a resilient alliance against Trump.

In Davos, the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen used the World Economic Forum (WEF) to warn Trump the EU would expand relations “not only with our long-time like-minded friends, but with any country we share interests with.” His speech was disseminated as the European response to Trump’s “America First” presidency.

Yet unfazed by her diplomatic maneuvers, Trump ripped the EU apart with his grandiloquence. In his virtual address at the WEF, he continued to thump the bloc for having "hundreds of billions of dollars" of deficit and not buying the US farm produce and cars and derided the Union’s red tape, pointing to recent multibillion fines on Apple and Google while accusing it of flooding America with millions of vehicles.

Hours after Trump signed an executive order to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement, putting America in line with the likes of Iran and Yemen, von der Leyen pitched the climate treaty as a “best hope for all humanity" and boasted of the EU's new partnerships with Mercosur, Switzerland and Mexico in an effort to portray the EU as a unified bloc.

While France-Germany tensions pose a serious threat to pan-Europeanism, EU unity is being further imperiled by the advent of the Eurosceptic, right-wing bloc comprising Hungary, Slovakia, Austria and possibly Czechia. The nationalist leaders such as Italy’s George Meloni, the only EU leader invited to Trump’s inauguration and Hungary’s Victor Orban, a longtime admirer of the deal maker, will also help Trump to split the Union and capitalize on the EU internal weaknesses.

Leaders across the EU are urging to stick together in dealing with Trump’s “zero-sum” trade war. These calls aren’t new. Several European leaders in the past have made such appeals without the European dream of becoming a formidable global force, capable of coping with economic and strategic challenges, coming into fruition.

Brussels has only itself to blame for stranding the bloc into this hapless position. By disregarding the downsides of the Biden administration's China-only tariff policy, the EU submitted to the US and torched its vital tool of strategic ambiguity, which would have helped it to become a major power broker and served as a hedge against the impending Trumpism.

Once Trump returned, the EU found it sheepishly apologetic, geopolitically isolated and strategically limbless in its effort to withstand the US president's tariff barrage and remain globally relevant. The way things are unfolding, Brussels could even struggle to sustain its distinctiveness as a bloc internationally with a possible China-US detente ruining its ambition of making the EU an influential player internationally.

A fragmented Brussels lacks options to brave Trump who has stunned America’s transatlantic allies by asking them to raise their defense spending to a whopping 5% of their GDP and could threaten to upend the US defense and security guarantee if Europe decides to retaliate by hitting America with its own tariffs. With divisions continuing to beleaguer the bloc, the EU is rather a soft target for Trump.

*My article (unedited) that first appeared in the "Express Tribune"

Trump’s dilemma on a trade deal with China

By: Azhar Azam

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared in "The Express Tribune":
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2051045/6-trumps-dilemma-trade-deal-china/

After G7 summit, the US President Donald Trump said that he believes China is sincere in seeking a trade deal with him and insisted Beijing wants “to make a deal badly”. He was responding to Chinese Vice Premier Liu He’s comments about China’s willing to resolve trade row through dialogue.

Trump’s softer but bitter riposte to Liu’s call for settling the issues with “calm attitude” was adolescent and redundantly vexatious as in the same remarks, the Chinese leader also stroked hard at the White House policies that were based on trade protectionism and technology blockades.

Also, the archives of China-US trade war manifestly deny the phony claim made by Trump. It is a blatant truth that Beijing has been urging Washington to defuse the warlike situation through talks since long but Trump’s showcasing about the Chinese persistent position as its weak link is outrageous.

The rash statement broke through after the US president came under tremendous pressure from leaders of G7 countries and businessmen, farmers, importers, and exporters of the US to put a full-stop on trade war that has rattled the world economies and people including the US.

Realistically, it is Trump himself who is pleading for a trade deal with Beijing as he is quickly falling short of munitions to hurt China economically in his useless feud. Therefore, he is searching out for a way out that could be dressed up in some sort of dignity and pride for him.

With all his tariff escalations, the US president would have made about 95% of the Chinese goods subject to 15% to 30% tariffs by December 16. While no more room for tariff intensification would remain at the disposal of Trump, this would necessarily mean that he would very soon concede his sole leverage in trade war against China.

His growing curbs to slap more tariffs on Chinese goods are coupled with tumbling Wall Street and the wheeling anxieties among the US manufacturers and exporters who have probably pressed Trump to get paler on Beijing while narrating about China’s sincerity in striking a trade deal with him.

Trump’s weird diplomacy has a serious flaw, which emphatically pivots on building close rapport with the other heads of states and slating their countries. Although he is very belligerent in his rhetoric but he does not shy to flatter his counterparts as well.

He asserts that Chinese President Xi Jinping is his “personal friend” and at the same time, declares China a foreseeable economic and strategic rival of the United States, which bears a significant threat to the US national security.

Last week, the US president took twitter to label Xi an enemy and just in a span of few days, he lavishly praised his Chinese peer as a great leader who is representing a great country. When asked about sudden shift in approach, Trump had a bizarre excuse “Sorry, this is the way I negotiate. The way I negotiate has done very well for me over the years and it’s even doing better for the country.”

The US president must know whether he pans or does he admire, Xi is the president of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and so would be the custodian of his country’s and people’s interests. Unlike Trump who has squeezed the future of many Americans, under Xi’s leadership China has pulled more than 700 million people out of poverty.

American would like their president to behave and serve his nation as Xi did for Chinese people. It was an example of American businesses’ trust on China that as soon as Trump ostensibly signaled to resume trade talks with Beijing, the markets at the Wall Street scooped.

Earlier given Trump Friday’s announcement of additional tariffs on China in response to Beijing’s intent to retaliate against US goods, Bloomberg wrote on Tuesday “Going into the traditional Labor Day end of the US summer, the prospects of a peaceful resolution to the trade war that has roiled financial market and helped slow the global economy seem far lower than they were on Memorial Day – and growing more distant week by week.”

The American shouldn’t place high hopes on the US president who has to date has failed to adopt a clear position on constructive trade dialogue instead lied to his folks about receiving a phone call from Chinese side to “get back to the table”, a claim China’s foreign ministry wasn’t aware of.

While Trump shifted and defended his ambition to shift trade war to ordering US manufacturing companies to move out of China, the newest method is doomed to collapse as the experts pointed out that no US president can order to leave a country.

So the stigma of Trump’s failed confrontational policies would keep chasing him until his term is expired or maybe it would continue to haunt him throughout his life.

Presidential election puts US political system to the test

By: Azhar Azam

The November 2020 presidential election in the US would be a cesspool of controversies, including allegations and counter-allegations, racism and bigotry with the Republican President Donald Trump indicating that he might reject the results if presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden wins.

In a recent interview with Fox News' host Chris Wallace, the master of shifting blame claimed that mail-in balloting, being pressed by Democrats as a response to the coronavirus pandemic, is "going to rig the election" and declined to be gracious enough to accept the potential defeat. "No, I'm not going to just say yes. I'm not going to say no, and I didn't last time either.”

Trump, who overly played down the threat of COVID-19 and is yet to come up with a public health strategy to contain the spread of disease, resisted the argument that the US has the seventh-largest mortality rate in the world and skirted taking responsibility for the dramatic surge in infected patients, passing the buck to the veteran US doctors.

He also challenged Biden's mental sharpness, reiterating that if elected, Biden would ruin the country and be pushed to the radical left.

The defamatory comment "Joe doesn't know he's alive" was just a drop in the bucket about his imperious approach toward his political opponent and a playback of his aggressive foreign policy that bullies the US international relationship and global trade system.

Opposing a new Fox national poll, which like other surveys, revealed Biden's glaring lead over Trump, he dubbed the erstwhile vice president "mentally shot." But one of the pollsters found precisely an inverse trend among the registered voters – showing that in mental soundness, intelligence and judgment capabilities – the former topped the latter in each of the measures.

Trump's petulant instinct to cull and defy outcomes when they do not favor him could brew into a blistering and sulfurous post-election crisis that would be chock-full of political disputes, charges of rigging and even violence in the streets over partial results due to mail-in voting and weeklong ballot counting.

Any hold up in the announcement of results over absentee voting could confound stark US challenges and its drift from an economic and health ordeal to political indecision.

Trump's fustian following the low turnout at his election rallies and dipping approval increases the risk of a nightmare scenario if he is voted out by public ballot.

By endorsing Attorney General William Barr's remarks that expanding votes-by-mail "absolutely opens the floodgates to fraud," Trump has already illumined his bullheaded nature that he would not vacate the White House benignly and has been preparing himself for a hard line irrespective of whether it will shove the country toward political disaster.

Larry Diamond, a senior fellow at the conservative-leaning Hoover Institution and the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University – alongside nearly 20 experts, political scientists, former lawmakers and historians – cautioned that there was "significant scope" of unprecedented crisis after the US wraps up the presidential election at the end of the year.

As many states are not ready to host absentee voting, and some like New York and Kentucky took longer than a week to declare recent congressional primary winners, the political uncertainty in the US is set to eclipse all previous grim records.

The "deep skepticism and concern across the political spectrum" could impinge on the economic fortune of millions of Americans who have been tricked by Trump's nonsensical economic, trade and foreign policies and are being bulldozed by his horrible virus prevention and control blunders.

Thanks to its own president, the US political system is confronted with a challenge: Protect the Americans gearing up to queue in Nile-long voting lines from in-person balloting and the potential health risks or satiate Trump, perhaps the most hedonistic and unpredictable head of state ever, lest he rejects Biden's victory.

On the other hand, if Trump grabs another term, it won't be easy for the US to prevent a turndown from Democrat partisans who are still trying to bind their wounds after the 2016 defeat over the so-called foreign meddling believed to have harmed Hillary Clinton and boosted Trump's candidacy, which forced them to question the legitimacy of the vote.

Experts told CNN if Trump wins, there is serious potential for civil unrest that could overshadow the large and sometimes violent protests that occurred after Trump's 2016 win.

Historian Douglas Brinkley warned that if Trump won the Electoral College again after losing the popular vote for a second time, it would trigger "a lot of clamoring that our democracy is broken."

As the virus continues to spread and new China tensions threaten to wipe 20 percent to 30 percent off the American markets, the end of the fierce campaign for the US presidency could be the stage for another spell of deep-seated political rivalry.

With Trump signaling that he would not give up and the Democrats ambitious to secure a ticket to the executive mansion, the US political system is put on a test.

*This is one of my opinion pieces that first appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)" https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-07-26/Presidential-election-puts-U-S-political-system-to-the-test-Sr0OrYy4us/index.html and was republished by "China Daily" http://124.127.52.76/a/202007/27/WS5f1e39d1a31083481725c306.html

Wang’s nimble response to Trump’s belligerence

By: Azhar Azam

*This is one of my articles (unedited) that first appeared in "Daily Times":
https://dailytimes.com.pk/479551/wangs-nimble-response-to-trumps-belligerence/

The state councilor and foreign minister of China Wang Yi exhibited his diplomatic brilliance at United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) and smartly rebuked Trump’s prior rhetoric against China in addition to touching several other global issues ranging from development to protectionism and unilateralism, peace and justice, and climate change.

While reiterating that China will not ever be cowered by threats and or subdued by pressure when facing headwinds of protectionism, the top Chinese diplomat flabbergasted the attending countries and the global community by declaring to sign up with the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which regulates the global transfers of small arms, missile launchers, and warship.

Wang’s announcement for China’s accession to ATT contradicted Trump’s ricochet that his country would never ratify the pact. In April, the United States had officially withdrawn from ATT – a global conventional arms market of about $70 billion.

Earlier in August, the US president had also retracted from Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) and had expressed his intent to deploy such weapons in Asia to counter any possible threat from China and Russian. Wang warned “China is opposed to the deployment of land-based intermediate-range missiles in the Asia-Pacific.”

As a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and fifth-largest arm exporter and one of the five-largest arms importers in the world, China pledge to sign the ATT would help UN to curb irresponsible and illicit global arms trafficking.

It would also give impetus to UN drive of peace and security, one of the global issues for which UNGA was originally established for and now serves as one of the major organs of the UN.

Insightfully reacting to Trump’s belligerence over China-US trade frictions that have inflicted losses largely to the US, Wang underscored that through Chinese unique economic system – “850 million Chinese have been shaken off poverty and hundreds of millions have joined the middle-income group.”

On Tuesday, the US President Donald Trump niffed the aromatic world stage by rekindling his attacks on China’ economic model accusing it was “dependent on massive market barriers, heavy state subsidies, currency manipulation, product dumping, forced technology transfers and the theft of IP, and trade secrets on a grand scale.”

Wang’s remarks were backed by some palpable evidence. China has made remarkable achievements in social development, particularly poverty alleviation. As the numbers amount to about three-quarters of the global poverty, China has contributed significantly in meeting United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be realized by 2030. In just five years from 2012 to 2017, 70 million people were rooted out of poverty.

As Chinese poverty alleviation statistics are validated by many international financial organization, Trump should had admired China’s efforts for lifting millions of people out of poverty but since the US president is suffering from Sinophobia, he exploited the global podium for decrying Chinese economic system.

Trump’s rancor towards China is not new. Several times in the past, he has expressed his antipathy for Beijing. While economic and political gurus believe that he mainly addressed his domestic audience in the speech rather the global issues, the US president also used the deliberation dais to bully countries with which he is pursuing a trade deal.

The US president further championed that Beijing wants to make a deal badly because they are losing their jobs, their supply chains are going to “hell” and companies are moving out of China.

Indeed, he lashed hard at China in an attempt to build pressure on China before next round of talks but he was intimidating to other countries as well to expedite a trade covenant with him or he would hit them hard with his tormenting speechifying.

China, at least, did not seem impressed at all from Trump’s onslaught. Beijing’s decision to waive off tariffs on some of the US goods and increase purchases from Washington was a good will gesture to pave the way of reconciliation in the worsening trade war between the two largest economies of the world.

By reaffirming Chinese commitment to resolve all trade disputes with Washington “in a calm, rational, and cooperative manner” – Wang, in fact, neatly watered-down Trump’s harsh tone and brushed away his bombasts at China by his elegant diplomatic skills. His comments showed that China is still pliant to hearing the US gripes that is why it is willing to buy more US products.

Inopportunely, Trump painted Chinese tensions-moderating move as its faintness. Since long, Beijing has been trying to make US realize that the trade war would not errand either of the two countries or the global economy. It is Trump himself who is inconsistent in his approach as he has a legacy of first pleading trade deals and once China is agreed, he disrupts the whole resolution process by his hardnosed tendency.

It is not just China which is the “punching bag” of Trump’s pomposities. In order to vindicate his “America first” mantra, he has not spared even the US closest allies such as Japan and the US partners in Europe.

Trump hasn’t yet understood that making America great again does not necessarily mean that he must force the economies of other countries to spoil. Trump can still transpire his MAGA rhyme into reality by embracing the conformist diplomatic and political channels.

Wang’s nimble reaction had some diplomatic tutorial for the US president who is frantically looking to dominate the world through his coercive economic and military policies. By calling for revival of Iran nuclear deal, urging the Gulf countries to carry out dialogue and consultation, peaceful resolution of Kashmir dispute, and pressing to bolster the political settlement of Korean peninsula – Wang truly represented China and the global community, the noble cause that was partially spoiled by Trump’s pessimistic linguistic.

Trump's 'Obliteration Day' tariffs will only strengthen China's resolve

By: Azhar Azam

As economists and analysts challenge the prudence behind U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs on China, the U.S. president has cranked up the heat, which will however leave ordinary Americans and his voters reeling from high inflation amid steep interest rates.

The Trump administration ramped up tariffs on Beijing to an unprecedented 145 percent when China responded with 84 percent retaliatory tariffs, forcing the world's biggest manufacturer to retaliate further with 125 percent levy on U.S. goods.

Economists and analysts warn that Beijing has built a largely trade war-proof economy over the decades and U.S. consumers will feel the pinch of Trump's salvo. China mostly exports consumer goods such as computers, gaming consoles, smartphones and toys to the U.S. and imports primarily industrial and manufacturing supplies, like aircraft, fossil fuels and soybean.

While China can absorb some of the price increases for U.S. goods before they are passed on to consumers or diversify much of its imports, Americans would struggle to find alternatives to China-made products. "If the world is settling in for a long trade war, Trump's most formidable rival has already fortified itself," an article in Bloomberg concluded.

Trump's global tariff spree has unnerved small and large businesses, and his voters. Those who voted him to revitalize the economy and get them jobs, not commit an economic suicide, are bracing for shock effects, including mass layoffs. Many are regretting their support, worrying that this "economic nuclear winter" would eat up their life savings at home, in banks or in stock markets.

One of Trump's overarching goals is to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. but he is mistaken. For instance, economists caution that footwear giant Nike, despite tariffs, won't shift production to make sneakers in America. Instead, it would redirect its sale to other countries like China.

Trump's tariff blitz has been called "worse than the worst-case scenario" and a "fundamental misunderstanding of how trade works," with critics grilling him for undermining the competitiveness of 140 million non-manufacturing workers.

The trade war has and continues to strengthen China. Notwithstanding the strenuous campaigns of successive U.S. administrations to hobble the Chinese economy, the country's export competitiveness has improved. In 2024, Beijing posted a record trade surplus of around $1 trillion from $823 billion in 2023. The astonishing growth indicates that Beijing, albeit facing some challenges, can weather a trade war.

Beijing has refused to cave in to the U.S. bullying, dubbing Trump's newest threat a "mistake on top of a mistake." Trump's extortionist-like approach has also been condemned by other world leaders, who have called his actions "deeply regrettable" and "brutal and unfounded."

Levies may affect China in the short-term but in the long run, they will help accelerate China's economic transition. For example, consumption in China is estimated to be around 60 percent of the national GDP, compared to the U.S.'s 70 percent to 80 percent. By revving up consumer spending, China may make up for the lost U.S. exports and march toward more self-reliance for growth.

Thanks to a number of government policies, consumption has been steadily climbing in China. Recent research showed that in the first quarter of 2025, indices measuring offline consumption, small commodity market operations, daily-life service and the leisure and entertainment industry all grew substantially, injecting a new vitality into the country's consumption market.

According to findings released by the U.S. National Retail Federation, a 60 percent blanket tax on Chinese goods is estimated to cost U.S. consumers between $46 billion and $78 billion in spending power. An escalation of the trade war will send them into uncharted waters.

Beijing is forecast to import record quantities of soybean in the April-June period. But with China's retaliation, U.S. farmers are slated to lose their biggest export market, a market that will not be easy to replace. As planting season nears in several U.S. regions, the tariff war has made American farmers fearful.

Economists and investors say Trump's "Liberation Day" will go down in history as "Ruination Day" and "Obliteration Day." It has put Boeing especially in a vulnerable position against rivals as China's retaliatory duties will significantly increase the cost of its aircraft. This blow will be hard, given that the American airplane manufacturer has projected a demand of 8,830 new planes in China through 2043. Boeing's loss could mean opportunities for China's home-grown large passenger aircraft C919.

Like its predecessor, Trump's second trade war would also be problematic. His "massive geostrategic mistake" presents an opportunity for China. By boosting consumption, fostering "industries of the future" such as embodied artificial intelligence, bio-manufacturing, and 6G technology, capitalizing on its lead in clean energy and electrical vehicles, and strengthening economic and trade cooperation with other countries, Beijing can blunt the impact of Trump's unparalleled aggression and sustain its pace of economic rejuvenation.

*Mr article that first appeared in CGTN:

Trump is failing at defeating the 'invisible enemy'

By: Azhar Azam

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-03-19/Trump-is-failing-at-defeating-the-invisible-enemy--OYTKY3F1Ze/index.html

Despite the spike in the number of coronavirus patients within the United States and its intrusion into the entire 50 states, the US President Donald Trump lends no time to take care of millions of Americans but clings days on rediscovering the disease’s country of origin or determining the nationality of Covid-19 by tagging it a “Chinese virus.”

Though he defends his repeated use of the phrase as a comeback to Chinese foreign spokesperson comments about probable US soldier’s involvement in the virus introduction – the racist tones and viral bigotry of his aides calling coronavirus “Wuhan virus” and “the Kung-Flu” tells of a cover up tactic to cloak the US administration’s real gaffes..

Snippy change in Trump’s behavior toward Beijing only emanated after his failure to preempt the lethal fallouts of the coronavirus in the US. Indeed since the onset of the Covid-19 crisis, his role has been lethargic and lacked the vital gravity needed to engulf a disease that is racing across the world, overwhelming healthcare systems and upending societies.

US president initially claimed that the coronavirus was “totally under control” and “to be down to close to zero” in the country. Just over a week earlier, he quoted the Surgeon General “The risk is low to the average America”, boasted of creating over 350,000 jobs and largely relied on the divisive travel ban measures on China and Europe including the UK.

Efforts by the White House officials to link the coronavirus outbreak with China are deliberate in a bid to stoke tensions with Beijing and distract the focus of the ordinary Americans from their blunders. In such an attempt, Trump misled the nation stating in his unusual Oval Office address that his early intense travel restrictions, which the European Union failed to take, prevented the Covid-19 to prevail in the US.

He made outlandish declaration knowing that the World Health Organization (WHO) had warned that such gauges are not usually effective in precluding the importation of epidemic cases but may have significant economic and social impact. So, the only major step Trump took was expected to do more harm than the good for Americans and the US economy and it did.

Chaotic president’s dramatic announcement to constrict most travel from Europe roiled the airports into mess, tanked the stock market and stunned the lawmakers on both sides of the Atlantic. The move infuriated the public health experts inside and outside of the US who slammed the decision, underscoring that the tack can theoretically just delay the spread of disease and could work strategically only if combined with the containment measures.

Trump, therefore, is only to blame himself for “Airlines and other” industries which he thought was affected by the “Chinese virus.” It is the result of his hawkish advisors that the country’s biggest airlines called on Washington for more than $50 billion in aid to endure the financial losses – which in fact suffered less from the pandemic and more from his slapdash decisions.

After a prolonged reticence over the prevalence of the illness and playing down the threat of the coronavirus in the US, Trump has finally realized that the Covid-19 “is a pandemic” and he always knew “this is a real.” However, in forcing him to understand the sensitivity of the situation and respond, the disease has infected more than 5,700 Americans and killed 100 of those.

In the grim nationwide circumstances, the US needs to implement lockdown and quarantine methods to safeguard the life and health of Americans. But following China, about whom the US congressmen and media have been overly clamorous until recently, would be extremely embarrassing for the Trump administration.

Though the US National Security Council on Monday denied the reports that there is going to be a “national lockdown” and the country was about to put in a mandatory two-week quarantine, Trump’s advice to the US citizens not to travel, stay home for the most part and “enjoy their living room” was none else than a suggestion to the people to voluntarily keep themselves in lockdown and quarantine.

While his guidance implicitly backed Chinese measures to control the spread of the coronavirus, Trump’s information on the disease and way of tackling the Covid-19 is steadily losing the trust of his compatriots who believe that their federal government was not taking sufficient steps to combat the public health crisis.

A NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll released on Tuesday showed that 70% of the Americans in March were concerned or very concerned about the increase of coronavirus in their community. An overwhelming majority of 60% wasn’t very much or not at all satisfied with the information they heard about coronavirus from the President Trump.

Instead of preparing the nation from the rising threats of coronavirus and taking effective preventive measures, the White House officials wasted several weeks in criticizing China or looking at the ways to count on its health crisis. Now with the dangers roaming on his skull, Trump now acknowledges “We have an invisible enemy” that “is a bad one,” “a very bad one.”

Trump’s Ukraine peace push is a dangerous delusion

By: Azhar Azam

President Donald Trump’s push to broker a peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow reflects less an instinct for mediation than an impulse to appease. He has acted as Russian President Vladimir Putin’s henchman – leaving Russia emboldened, Ukraine isolated, allies abandoned and international security at risk.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy discovered this harsh reality when he, earlier this year, sought Trump's support to deliver a strong response to Russia’s unprovoked invasion. Against all expectations, he received no assurances – just public humiliation.

Trump’s blunt tone and abrasive treatment of a partner under siege revealed that under his presidency, Washington’s foreign policy will be driven by self-interest, not commitment and values.

By making overtures to Moscow, Trump is tearing apart a coalition of 50 nations, his predecessor painstakingly stitched together to shore up Kyiv’s defense. He appears willing to surrender Ukraine’s sovereignty and undermine Europe’s security.

Trump’s placation of a revisionist leader has transcended all limits. He has placed the onus of ending the war on Ukraine, painting Russia as a victim. Not long ago an impassioned defender of democratic freedoms, human rights and transatlantic cohesion – America under new president has defected to an authoritarian adversary – branding Zelenskyy as a “dictator” and dismissing conflict as a European war.

Chasing personal glory and rapid-fire peace deals, he has talked of territorial swaps, nixed Ukraine’s Nato membership, refused security guarantees to Ukraine and pressured Zelenskyy to end the war on Putin’s terms – ceding Crimea to Moscow. Trump’s “deal-making” normalizes aggression and encourages Russia to demand recognition of “new territorial realities.”

This isn't diplomacy – it's capitulation. This doesn’t just reward aggression – it hails tyranny. Worse, this approach shakes the foundation of transatlantic security and casts serious doubts on US commitment to allies.

His action to trade away Ukraine's sovereignty for self-projection has broader implications for global security. It set a dangerous precedent for other powers to resort to use of force – emboldening Israel to flex its muscles beyond Gaza as exemplified by its military campaign in Qatar, a staunch US ally, to target Hamas top leadership.

Trump's abandonment of Ukraine will reinforce the global south's suspicions on US reliability as a security partner and guardian of the rules-based international order, hastening their embrace of a China-led global governance model – not out of ideological convergence but out of disillusionment with America’s negotiable commitments with partners.

To prevent this drift, Washington must reestablish its credibility. Clinging to an arrogant obsession of the world's lone-superpower won’t change the global south’s perception.

For America to change this view, it must treat existing allies as equals, build new partnerships – not alliances – with individual countries and demonstrate that it values its allies regardless of economic and military weight.

Even Europe is growing wary. The bloc’s 2025 Strategic Foresight Report underscores that security has become a “key vector” for all European policies, stressing “We are witnessing the erosion of the rules-based international order and fracturing of the global landscape.” Britain, Belgium, France and Portugal and several US allies have announced to recognize Palestine – apparently in a backlash against Trump’s protectionism and ambivalence toward European security.

Moscow, meanwhile, is exploiting Trump’s whimsical approach. Far from tempering its stance, it has hardened its conditions to end the war, demanding most of the territory it has seized and some of which it's yet to, accepting Zelenskyy only as a “de facto” head of a “regime” rather than as a leader of a sovereign state.

Putin continues to pin the blame of his invasion of Ukraine on the “(2014) coup” and Kyiv’s accession to Nato – a narrative echoed by some Western scholars but belied by Russia’s annexation of Ukrainian land.

More than a decade later, the West’s assessment has prevailed with Russia seizing almost 20% of Ukraine. And despite Trump’s assurance to deny Nato membership to Ukraine, Putin is seeking more – let alone returning the occupied territory. His dizzying pace and bountiful concessions to Moscow have shocked allies and invited escalation.

If this is the peace deal, he boasted on his campaign trail to clinch in 24 hours, Ukraine and Europe are rightly alarmed. Surrender, dressed up as statesmanship, won’t bring peace – it will weaken Ukraine, fracture transatlantic bonds and strengthen authoritarian rivals.

Trump must reverse course. To reestablish US credibility and sustain its global leadership, he must deter aggression, reaffirm Washington’s commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and allies including those in the global south and strengthen – not undercut – the rules-based international order.

Inaction is not an option. Failure to act risks dragging the world back to the prewar era – only this time, not with bayonets, but with far deadlier weapons and nuclear stockpiles – a catastrophe for both America and the rest.

*My article (unedited) that first appeared in Brussels News and Express Tribune with the title "Need to reverse course reestablish US credibility"

Reconverge in Afghanistan?

By: Azhar Azam

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared in "The Nation":
https://nation.com.pk/29-Jul-2019/reconverge-in-afghanistan

Imran Khan and Donald Trump are sometimes satirically likened for their identical personal and political traits about roasting their opponents by their flashy but engrossing public oratories. But it is true that the two unpredictable leaders have literally disrupted the orthodox politics in their respective countries. They also share similar thoughts on sidestepping their militaries to engage in overseas conflicts.

The two compatible characters fascinate each other so the two idiosyncratic talents could be able to fabricate a close rapprochement after they met in summit-level showdown in White House on Monday. Given their unique nature, either of the two is abundant in inventive diplomatic gadgets that could help them to take bold steps in order to repair and ratchet up bilateral relations between Pakistan and the United States.

Khan would be a Trump’s recipe to win 2020 US presidential elections. This is because the pullback of the US troops from Afghanistan was one of the Trump’s key promises with the Americans. Khan, at the same time, has been trying to persuade the world not to treat Afghan Taliban as social ‘pariahs’ while championing for peace negotiations with them – an initiative the US finally picked to ease down conflicts in Afghanistan. That is why Afghanistan unequivocally topped the agenda in Khan-Trump break through meeting.

The unpremeditated and grilling leaders repulsed the past Twitter stand-off in which Trump’s castigated Islamabad over Osma bin Laden despite ‘billions of dollars in aid’ and Khan lashed back at Trump’s ‘tirade against Pakistan’ that sought to make Pakistan a ‘scapegoat’ for the US ‘failures’ in Afghanistan. In its place, the ‘media predators’ showed a cohesive front and complimented each other in their televised talks.

While Khan and Trump would be easing down tensions politically, the Afghan solution would actually be framed out in the Pentagon where the military and intelligence leaderships of Pakistan and US would engage in extensive discussions on a potential peace agreement with Taliban. That would be in fact the talks that would outline the future roadmap for a stable and peaceful Afghanistan.

The intense military talks would result in yet another close cooperation between American Central Investigation Agency (CIA) and Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to once again jointly work on Afghanistan. The prior intelligence cooperation between the two powerful covert organizations dates back to more than 30 years ago when they profoundly liaised to push back former Soviet Union from Afghanistan. It was the effective CIA-ISI intelligence teamwork that helped the US to fix its Sputnik-era foe once for all and Pakistan to protect its national sovereignty from rotten Russian security threats.

In an interview with Fox News earlier this month, Trump avowed if the US troops were to leave entirely “I would leave very strong intelligence there (Afghanistan). His annotations explicitly hint at the convergence of CIA and ISI afresh. The intelligence cooperation is also on the cards as Trump’s nominee for Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley recently asserted “Pakistan is a key partner in achieving US interests in South Asia” and that “we need to maintain a military-to-military ties based on our shared interests.”

The relations between the two spy agencies soured in 2011 after Islamabad outwardly refused to expand its military operations to North Waziristan and the affairs went in a trough following US killing of bin Laden in Pakistan. However lately, the bilateral connections are set to reestablish as Trump administration and the Pentagon are quite relieved with Pakistan’s ‘positive contributions’ for Afghan peace process.

But due to extended snap-off in the Pak-US relations and suspension of US security assistance, Islamabad has winged towards Beijing and Moscow to meet its economic and security needs. For Washington and the Department of Defense (DOD), perhaps it won’t be doable task to regain its cold war ally especially over US erstwhile pigheaded and distant behavior of abandoning Pakistan after achieving its regional objectives. If China and other allies were not there to rescue Pakistan defense, the damage to Pakistan’s national sovereignty could have been irreversible.

Then there is the demographic time bomb – Kashmir – that has several times pushed India and Pakistan on the brink of a nuclear war. Trump asserted to have obtained Modi’s request for mediation over Kashmir dispute but Indian external affairs spokesperson was terribly quick to decline his claim. “No such request has been made by PM (Narendra Modi) to US President,” he said in a tweet. Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi trashed the foreign ministry edict and urged Modi to surface the truth.

Kashmir is the regional flashpoint that has consistently battered the Indo-Pak relations since their independence from British Empire. Pakistan stresses to resolve Kashmir conflict through international mediation or arbitration and in accordance with UN resolution on Kashmir, a call that India denies. If US could help the longstanding row, it would surely allow Pakistan to better focus on peace in Afghanistan, the nub of US national security interests abroad.

Peace in Afghanistan goes in Pakistan’s national interest so it is ardent to support and facilitate US-Taliban talks and the intra-Afghan dialogue. But the US and international community must also recognize Islamabad’s contributions in global war on terror (GWOT) that has cost it over 70,000 human casualties and more than $150 billion in economic losses.

The blame is on Trump for US soybean farmers' angst and unrest

By: Azhar Azam

*This is one of my opinion pieces (unedited) that first appeared at "China Global Television Network (CGTN)":
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2019-08-07/The-blame-is-on-Trump-for-U-S-soybean-farmers-angst-and-unrest-IYcyCOSWOc/index.html

On Tuesday, China’s central bank deeply regretted US Treasury Department’s determination to designate Beijing as a “currency manipulator”, accentuating the label does not meet the quantitative standards of the so-called “currency manipulator. The statement also subbed the US act “a wayward unilateral and protectionist behavior”.

In its press release, the US Treasury Department has earlier said that Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin would take up the issue to International Monetary Fund (IMF) “to eliminate the unfair competitive advantage created by China’s latest actions.”

Interestingly, the Trump administration would approach an international financial watchdog which has recently stated that the Chinese RNB/Yuan exchange rate is generally in lines with the fundamentals.

While deliberately discounting the fact that Chinese Renminbi is the strongest currency in G-20 countries that has witnessed considerable appreciations over the years – Trump’s deplorable actions towards China intuit that he is craving to inflame pressure on Beijing by expanding trade war into other portfolios such as forex and financial markets.

Trump administering fails to comprehend that Yuan deflation would not necessarily increase China’s exports; instead such irrepressible episodes could lead Chinese capital outflows to panic and import costs to soar as well as could threaten country’s financial stability.

The latest move textured after last week the US President Donald Trump popped up on twitter and announced that he would whack 10% tariffs on remaining $300 billion of Chinese goods while asserting that Beijing is not buying large quantities of US agriculture produce, soybeans being the largest.

Maybe Trump’s newer verdict was based on an archaic trade data. Earlier this year when China-US trade war was at full boom, Chinese soybeans imports from US had plummeted by a whopping 70.6% to 4.3 million tons for the first four months (January to April) of 2018.

But immediately after Trump and Xi agreed to play down trade frictions at G-20 summit in Osaka, China honored its pledge and bought about 2.3 million tons of US soybeans whereas another 2 million tons of US soybean shipments would reach China in August.

According to Chinese state planner National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), Beijing has imported 130,000 tons of soybeans, 120,000 tons of sorghum, 60,000 tons of wheat and 65,000 tons of cotton and other products from July 19 to August 2 from the US.

So Trump’s claim about China not importing US agriculture products in bulk is doomed to absurd and irrational. In fact, the US president is putting lame excuses to vindicate his baseless farm produce accusation that is followed by his unsubstantiated currency manipulation charges on China.

US unremitting provocative measures invite China’s ire. Hence in response to Trump’s trade crusade, on Monday China said that it would not rule out the possibility to levy additional tariffs on US agriculture imports. As a result, the Chinese companies have halted their imports of US agriculture produce from August 3.

Trump’s incessant and hot trade manipulation tactics have hard-pressed China to find some reliable soybean and other agriculture produce suppliers other than the US. During Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the Kremlin in June, China and Russia signed a comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination in a new era including a Development Plan on Deepening China-Russian Cooperation in Soybeans.

Beijing is the world’s largest buyer of soybeans and consumes about 110 million tons of soybeans against domestic production of just 16 million tons. In a blow to the US farmers, Chinese farmers would now grow soybean in Russia to send back home and to meet massive domestic consumption.

China’s General Administration of Customs (GAC) is thoroughly facilitating the consensus reached by Chinese and Russian president and has now allowed soybean imports from all over Russia – expanding prior imports from just five Russian regions bordering China. According to a report by Chinese agriculture department, a total of 28 Chinese soybean companies have invested in outside China - Russia being the largest with 20 companies.

While China is only taking preventive measures to look out for sustainable farm produce suppliers, the US soybean and other farmers should only blame their president for the unrest and angst among them and that has slashed US agriculture exports from $19.5 billion in 2017 to $9.1 billion in 2018.

Why Trump is tightening up India's screws?

By: Azhar Azam

For many years, India successfully leveraged US tensions with China and Russia to its advantage, playing both ends against the middle. On one side, New Delhi spotlighted its potential as a counterweight to China and on the other, it reaffirmed its allegiance to Chinese- and Russian-led geopolitical blocs, BRICS and SCO, which America believes pointedly challenge its global leadership by pursuing to construct an alternative international order and upend US dollar dominance.

Employing Machiavellian diplomatic maneuvering and lofty claims, India framed itself as a prized American partner whose indispensability was central to implement US Indo-Pacific strategy. Tactics worked as Trump, in his first term, pitched India as a vital ally in the Indo-Pacific to set off a new cold war with China. His successor Joe Biden, after initially pressing India to cut back its oil purchases from Moscow over its invasion of Kyiv, too inveigled it to advance shared interests in the region.

India’s archetypal practice of changing goalposts when it suits its interests, what New Delhi calls a non-aligned policy, drove it to circumvent rifts with China, swindle the West and boost trade with Russia. Its trade with Moscow last year topped $68 billion, about six times the pre-pandemic levels. Shockingly, India’s imports from Russia accounted for almost 93% of bilateral trade including $50.3 billion spent on buying Russian discounted crude.

The Indian refined oil exports to Europe surged a whisper below 250% from 2019, largely because it shipped Russian crude after refining to European countries. India’s staggering trade with Russia, redirected oil shipments to Europe and supply of components for Russian drones for its military campaign in Ukraine hid New Delhi’s treacherous currents to exploit the conflict on European shores for its economic gains while supporting the Russian war economy. This binary approach further allowed India to abuse its strategic partnership with the US to evade sanctions and benefit from America’s “friend-shoring,” becoming for the first time the leading smartphone supplier to the US.

Once Trump returned, New Delhi betted on personal bonhomie between him and Modi to navigate choppy terrain and brave the former's tariff blitz but the president tormented India’s lofty plans. After embarrassing it by wooing its arch rival Islamabad and rubbing salt in India’s wounds – declaring trade and joint oil exploration deals with Pakistan – Trump ordered a tariff hike of 50% on India in response to its “most strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary Trade Barriers” and oil purchases from Russia.

Deals with Islamabad may cloak Washington’s geopolitical interests in mineral-rich Balochistan such as monitoring Iran’s nuclear program and counter Chinese influence; America’s presence in insurgency-riven province will represent complex challenges for India’s subversive agenda of stoking sedition in neighboring country through support for secessionist movements and terrorist organizations.

The goal behind Trump’s India bashing is, unarguably, transactional. Unlike Moscow, New Delhi maintains a jaw-dropping trade deficit in goods with Washington of $45.8 billion. He wants to rebalance this lopsided trade relationship that is heavily tilted toward India owing to its tariff and non-tariff barriers with his rhetoric dispatching New Delhi in a state of paranoia.

Data from World Trade Organization (WTO) reckons India’s simple average tariff rate at 17% compared to America's 3.3%. These high tariffs and factors such as import restrictions, import licensing and medical device price control as well as poor environmental standards, with particular matter (PM2.5) roughly 10 times the World Health Organization’s guidelines, stifle foreign competition and unfairly bolster domestic competitiveness.

Modi’s vision, “Atmanirbhar Bharat” or “Viksit Bharat 2047” replicates Trump’s “Make America Great Again” to “Make India Great Again” including by imposing a simple average agricultural tariff of 39% in contrast to the US’ 5%. Such protectionist policies had, hitherto, allowed New Delhi to take advantage of its strategic location in the Indo-Pacific to reap trade and economic advantages from America yet have now put India at Trump’s point-blank range whose volley of tariff bullets threaten to shave off half a percent of Indian GDP.

Not only Trump’s claim, India is “selling (Russian oil) on the open market for big profit,” is precisely accurate; He’s also right when he labels India a “tariff king” with “one of the highest tariffs in the world.” It's New Delhi’s indisposition to cut taxes rather than Trump’s stubbornness that poses risks to US-India decades-old relationship.

Expecting him to underrate India's economic potential and strategic significance would, however, be naïve. His core objective instead is to weed out irritants from the bilateral relationship, which could propel US-India strategic partnership into obfuscation, to strengthen the US and India hyphenation for long-term geopolitical goals in the Indo-Pacific. It was illustrated by “US-India COMPACT for the 21st Century” that pledged to “elevate military cooperation across all domains” in the region.

But first, he seeks to settle the trade score. Since February, Trump’s aides have negotiating a deal with New Delhi to address the bilateral trade deficit by augmenting sale of US military equipment and oil and gas to India. Despite several rounds of talks, there’s no progress on a US-India deal, insinuating the latter's reluctance to open its market for US businesses and buy defense gear and energy supplies from Washington. India would hope to go scot-free over US broader objectives to use India as a strategic hedge against China yet Trump, this time, is in an unforgiving mode.

More than two decades after supporting China’s accession to the WTO, the US is bewailing its strategic lapse of clearing the way for Beijing’s dominance in world manufacturing. By tightening up the screws on India, Trump is buckling down to minimize the specter of another “China Shock” that would be a death knell for US competitiveness and its downward-leaning global leadership.

*My article that first appeared in Express Tribune

Trump's behavior could further discredit US image

By: Azhar Azam

*The edited version of this article first appeared in CGTN https://news.cgtn.com/news/3d3d514d7867444d35457a6333566d54/index.html

The U.S. behavior towards its European Union (EU) allies has equivalently been intrusive but unfortunately, this domineering Washington’s mindset is spiraling under Trump administration. Washington and Brussels have been long-standing allies but Trump has been impulsively drumming the EU since his canvassing for the president.

Diplomatically, the truculent U.S. regime contends that its European allies are free to make their sovereign purchases but pragmatically, it has never vacillated to influence their decision-making capacity and has frequently prevented them to take an independent line.

In an interview to the British daily, the American President encouraged UK to refuse to pay 39 billion pounds Brexit divorce bill and “walk away” if Brussels does not bow to Britain’s demand. He further said that it was too late for Britain to follow his advice and “sue” the EU to give Britain greater “ammunition” in the talks.

Earlier in a pave-way trip for Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reached on a four-nation trip to Europe to make EU allies understand (forcefully) the risks associated with buying Huawei equipment and dealing with Iran or get ready to bear the consequences.

Trump has also been blowing up the U.S. European Union (EU) partners in the past at will – slapping tariffs on their aluminum and steel, calling them “delinquent” for not meeting the defense spending mark, and warning them on trade with Iran.

So, it’s the time for Trump to escalate the trade war and jolt the EU economy.

Earlier, EU trade commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom intuited the trade war escalation between the U.S. and the EU and alerted the bloc’s trade ministers that the U.S. President may hit the European companies and products with billions of pounds of tariffs as early as in July or August.

But Brussels will retaliate strongly just as it did on steel and aluminum previously. The EU officials have already made it clear to Washington that it would slap 20 billion euros of U.S. goods if they are going to tax their autos.

This time Trump’s tariff apparatus is not intended to strike a deal with EU but to enforce it on proscribing Huawei in the region and enact Washington sanctions on Iran. Trump’s prior 180-day deadline to negotiate with EU on reduction exports of cars to the United States also elaborates his dictatorial attitude even towards the American allies.

As a matter of fact, EU is largely beleaguered for its dogma to distance itself from Trump’s swathe of attacks on Beijing and for its repeated refutation to lean to the U.S. demands over restricting Huawei’s business operations and trade with Iran.

And on both issues, the UK too is supporting the EU as Britain, France, and Germany are developing a special purpose vehicle INSTEX that aims to facilitate the trade between EU and Iran, bypassing the US sanctions.

China isn’t just looking at the proceedings. As the trade tensions between China and the United States dazzle the world, Chinese Vice President Wang Qishan just concluded his visit to Germany and departed to the Netherlands.

Wang’s trip to two of EU important countries is crucial since he is a top Xi aide and has formerly headed the trade talks with the United States.

Beijing and Berlin have strong trade ties. Germany has been China’s largest trading partner in Europe for 43 consecutive years while China has been the biggest trading partner of Germany for third successive years. The bilateral trade between China and Germany reached nearly 200 billion euros in 2018.

China and Germany are on the same page on Iran too. As both China and Germany are the signatories of Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCOPA), the 2015 Vienna nuclear deal and are critical of U.S. policy on Iran – it is highly unlikely that Secretary Pompeo would have gained any positive feedback from Berlin on Iran or Huawei.

For Trump, any pact that bypasses the United States or benefits the U.S. adversaries is void. Therefore he moans about the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline – which runs from Russia to Europe across the Baltic Sea – accusing Germany for putting the European energy security at risk by working with Moscow.

Rainer Seele, the head of Austria-based oil and gas company OMV, lashed out at Washington for trying to “dictate” the energy policy to its EU allies, blaming that the United States wants to secure markets for its own gas supplies. He also urged Europe to protect the independence of its own countries.

Clearly, the United States is falling short of allies to deter China and with the continuing Trump’s sporadic behavior; it could quickly find itself into international pariahs as well.

US Afghan Policy: Hawkish but Hopeless

By: Azhar Azam

Long before the candidature of White House habitation, Trump has been a strong knocker of US involvement in Afghanistan. ‘Our troops are being killed by the Afghanis we train and we waste billions there. Nonsense! Rebuild the USA.’

Ron Paul is right that we are wasting trillions of dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 13, 2011

But running into presidential election campaign, Trump reversed his ‘original instinct’ to cede Afghan war; opining US to stay in Afghanistan to avoid total collapse of Afghan government and to keep a check on neighboring nuclear country, Pakistan.

Though he still maintains touting to oppose ‘nation building’ (in Afghanistan) but now is more interested in ‘killing terrorists’ – a posture inflamed many Afghans who believe that it would escalate tensions, perpetuate casualties in Afghanistan and would make no difference to common Afghans.

In his hard-nosed speech on Monday, Trump finally bared key sockets of long awaited US policy on Afghanistan – a strategy that engrosses Pakistan more than the conflicted territory, Afghanistan, where the United States is fighting its longest battle ever.

In his hopeless rhetoric toward Pakistan, he accused Pakistan for providing safe havens to ‘agents of chaos, violence, and terror’ and paying billions of dollars in aid; pushing Pakistan ‘to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace’.

A hawkish but a naive on complex regional dynamics, Trump’s boxing policy is only a futile effort to prevent betrayed Pakistan to join the camps of US rivals – China and Russia. Instead, Trump blitz over Pakistan has rallied both Beijing and Moscow to defend Pakistan and denounce new US plan.

In a press briefing on Tuesday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson defended its ‘all-weather’ friend Pakistan and praised for its ‘great sacrifices’ and ‘important contributions’ in the war on terror. Talking on telephone to secretary of state Rex Tillerson, Chinese foreign minister Yang said that US must value Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan and respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and reasonable security concerns.

Russian special envoy to Afghanistan, Zamir Kabulov, also echoed a similar sentiment and slated US Afghan policy – declaring Pakistan ‘a key player regional player to negotiate with’ and need not to be pressurized that may seriously destabilize peace in the region and may result in negative consequences for Afghanistan.

Pakistan has commendably gained a great success in combating terrorism by reaching out and destroying their hideouts – an action US troops feared to take in Afghanistan to avoid casualties. The country has sacrificed nearly 70,000 people and armed forces and suffered over $100 billion of economic loss in the war on terror.

According to US State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2016, 75% of deaths were caused by 55% of all terrorist attacks in five countries – including Pakistan. In 2016, Pakistan experienced a substantial decline of 27% and 12% in terrorist attacks and total deaths respectively.

More surprisingly, terrorist attacks and total deaths in Afghanistan also fell considerably by 22% and 14% correspondingly – thanks to border management services by Pakistan on its western borders – to control arms and terrorist movements, and drug trafficking.

In an epitome of great successes against terrorism in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, according to US State Department itself – United States must have had acknowledged Pakistan vital role and great successes in fighting terror. Instead, Pakistan is being accused for safe havens, using proxies, and supporting terrorism by US administration – contradictory to its own certified reports, posing serious concerns over Pakistan’s trust on United States.

Military and economic sanctions is an old tactic, Trump is trying to sell Americans in a new pack. Ash Carter, Obama’s secretary of defense, had before refused to certify Pakistan over the same paranoid basis to cease $300 million. Pentagon, under leadership of current secretary of defense, James Mattis, withheld another $50 million. Last year, Congress put on hold the proposed sale of eight F-16 to Pakistan as well.

This amount is ridiculously low to challenge Pakistan economic and defense challenges. US is threatening to ‘act’ much latter when Pakistan has already made a major strategic shift to getting close to China and Russia.

According to a report ‘Direct Overt U.S. Aid Appropriations for and Military Reimbursements to Pakistan, FY2002-FY2016’ prepared by Congressional Research Service (CRS) for distribution to multiple congressional offices, a total of $33.4 billion was appropriated for US aid to Pakistan for 15-years. Trump’s catchphrase of ‘billions and billions of dollars” centers this report so as most of the analysts’.

It distinctly shows a vertical decline in US aid appropriations to Pakistan over the period of 5-years on account of economic, security-related, and Coalition Support Fund (CSF) Reimbursements. These are just appropriations which have been subject to obligations and final disbursements, which are generally far lower than these appropriations.

As Note ‘f’ expounds, CSF Reimbursements are disbursed to Pakistan for logistics and operational support of US-led military operations – a bias to overvalue the aid. In total, US appropriations for FY2016 totaled just $322 million and $226 million on account of a number of economic-related and security-related programs. Actual releases are even lower than this.

foreignassistance.gov is State-owned institution that provides information of US assistance to other countries including planned, obliged, and actually spent. It also demonstrates an invariable declining trend in US aid to Pakistan over the years – spending values too have been much lesser than allocation.

For example, US apportioned $742 million to Pakistan for FY2017 (ending 30-September-2017) but obligated just $142 million and spent only $130 million for the fiscal year on various programs such as: Humanitarian Assistance, Economic Development, Education and Social Services, Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance, Health, Program Management, and Peace and Security.

Trump stance on funding Pakistan is entirely opposite to the state’s data and seriously doubts US intent to resolve issues to bring peace and stability in the region. In nutshell, Trump announced a plan to ‘ditch’ Pakistan which was devised much before his road to the White House.

Praising India, a country with literally no contribution toward ensuring peace in the region, hints at the changing US tactics in the region, Pakistan realized quickly and reciprocated valiantly by tying with Russia along with China. United States repeatedly stunk Pakistan after obtaining its objectives and in the last few years, US tilt to India already warned Pakistan of ‘inclined US approach’ in the region.

Galvanizing distant India into Afghanistan is ‘lesson’ meant to convey Pakistan for actively supporting and partnering China’s Silk Road aiming to connect 4.4 billion people, more than 60 countries, and share 30% of the global economy. US hopes that India could downgrade Chinese growing influence in the region.

But Trump invitation to India to help US in resolving the Afghanistan puzzle would draw a more bizarre situation that would only tremor peace in the South-Asia. US is seeking support from a country that has failed to prevent riots in its own territory – Indian held Kashmir – despite deploying almost a million security forces.

The United States is relying on a country that is unwilling to have any combatting forces’ footprints in Afghanistan and at a place, where 150,000 NATO and US troops failed to achieve country’s national security interests and goals over a period of 16-years. Whatever kind of support Trump is seeking from India; it is going to be an inevitable flaw of his strategy in this part of the world.

At the same time, Trump might bully on Pakistan but options scant! Pakistan is the only source for the United States from where it can resupply its troops and other supplies to land-locked Afghanistan. US officials fret if Pakistan becomes an active foe, it could further destabilize Afghanistan and more importantly jeopardize lives of US soldiers on the Afghan soil.

Talking to ABC News, Brookings Fellow Vanda Felbab-Brown said ‘The president says this is a strategy for victory – I don’t think this is a strategy for victory. I think it’s a strategy of avoiding catastrophe, but essentially it’s a strategy of buying us hope'.

Former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta responded, ‘the words that concern me the most that we are going to win this war and I think the reality is that Afghanistan is not a war that is going to be won in traditional sense’.

‘If we try to somehow tell the American people that there is going to be a military victory here, I think frankly that’s going to mislead the American Public’, Panetta added.

In an interview with RT, former Congressman and presidential candidate blasted Trump for his ‘U-Turn’ and also detonated his speech in a Tweet storm:

If Americans are tired of 16 year war, how will they feel about another decade or two? When will they wake up?

— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017

Shorter Trump: "Afghanistan: give us your minerals!"

— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017

 Terrorism is one thing, but what about massive collateral damage? Killing civilians creates more terrorism. Round and round we go.

— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017

Remember: there was no al-Qaeda until our foolish invasion of Iraq based on neocon lies.

— Ron Paul (@RonPaul) 22 August 2017