April 2025

Tariff Crisis a Wake-up call for Global South – Unite or Perish | Mohammed Saqib |

|
  • Mohammed Saqib

THE US PRESIDENT Donald Trump’s recent sweeping tariff agenda represents perhaps the most aggressive trade policy initiative in modern history. It is another sign of U.S. arrogance and unilateralism that has sent shockwaves across global markets. The staggering tariffs on U.S. imports threaten a trade disruption, destabilizing the global economy. These measures will likely damage supply chains, cause inflation, lead to global market volatility, and disproportionately harm the Global South members.

The current tariff crisis is a wake-up call — unite or perish. It presents itself as not only a challenge, but also an opportunity for a unified Global South response, one that amplifies the voice and influence of developing nations in shaping international economic governance.

 

China faces punitive tariffs of up to a bizarre 245 percent, while India, though in a comparatively low position at 26 percent (currently on a 90-day hold), is in a precarious state between strategic autonomy and economic pragmatism.

The United States may label India “tariff king” for its trade practices, but it hypocritically imposes tariff burdens on nearly all its trade partners, regardless of their development status. This approach seems to be a strategy to reestablish unilateral U.S. dominance in global trade governance, in the guise of efforts to address trade deficits or protect American jobs.

The announced tariff on global imports shifts from targeted pressure to aggressive economic nationalism. Countries in the Global South, intricately linked to Chinese manufacturing networks, are bracing for a significant fallout.

Amid this economic chaos, the White House is using intimidation tactics. Policies are announced, held and withdrawn by the hour. Some nations are being tempted by offers of preferential market access from the United States in exchange for reducing their economic ties with China. However, countries should look at historical examples that strongly advise against falling into the trap of opportunism.

Negotiating individual deals with the United States may falsely suggest secure national interests but actually weaken collective bargaining power. Bilateral agreements offer neither security nor sustainability in a system that allows unilateral changes to rules. Global South members must understand that such deals can undermine their collective negotiating strength.

India and China, the fastest-growing large economies with a combined GDP of more than 22 trillion U.S. dollars and nearly 35 percent of the global manufacturing capacity, possess significant economic leverage. Their collaboration can potentially create substantial benefits for both themselves and the broader developing world.

By working together, the two countries can establish vital market access reciprocity, develop an alternative financial framework, harmonize technical standards and coordinate resources effectively for the Global South. This constructive partnership can pave the way for more equitable global economic governance. Moreover, accelerating de-dollarization and strengthening frameworks like the BRICS and New Development Bank could enhance their financial autonomy.

While India-China coordination is essential for an effective response, the broader Global South must be engaged. The Bandung Conference in 1955 and the WTO Bali Ministerial Conference in 2013 demonstrated the potential for South-South cooperation.

Developing nations can counter U.S. economic coercion and amplify their influence in international economic governance with solidarity, and India-China coordination is crucial. When these giants speak as one, the world will indeed listen.

 [ Mohammed Saqib is an Economist and  Convenor of COGGS. The article is syndicated from Xinhua News Agency. ] 

Tariff Crisis a Wake-up call for Global South – Unite or Perish | Mohammed Saqib | Read Post »

Prez Trump’s Tariff to Reframe Global Commerce?

|

Ayanangsha Maitra

THROUGH A CASCADE of reforms on both the domestic and global fronts, President Donald Trump’s honeymooning administration of the US has been rapidly setting a legacy built on a personalized vision of governance and a rebranded nationalism – Make America Great Again. Tariffs, President Trump’s  most favoured tool of economic statecraft, serve as both the emblem of this approach and its proving ground—nowhere more vividly than in his stance toward China. The announcement of 245 per cent tariff on China is just a threat to the nation alone but to other competitive economies as well.

For the uninitiated,  the US goods trade with China rose to $582.4 billion in 2024. On the other hand the US goods imports from China in 2024 valued  $438.9 billion, up 2.8 percent ($12.1 billion) from 2023, according to the secretariat of USTR. In 2024, the US recorded a goods trade deficit of $295.4 billion with China.

 

crane, cargo, industry, dock, harbour, loading, delivery, trade, freight, machine, unloading, technology, shipyard, structure, lift, industrial, construction, mechanical, work, equipment, lifting, metal, heavy, steel, hoist, machinery, block and tackle, weight, load, strength

When President Donald Trump declared “the ball is in China’s court,” he cast the trade war in the language of sport—poised between chess-like strategy and the fluid urgency of football or cricket. China, like a batsman under hostile bowling or a team defending in extra time, faces the burden of response amid shifting rules and uneven ground. Yet in such high-stakes game, success lies not merely in reaction, but in redefining the field itself. While announcing such a move, the US administration accused Beijing of deliberately restricting main high-tech materials—such as gallium, germanium, and antimony—critical to the military, aerospace, and semiconductor sectors. In a retaliatory move, China intensified its control by suspending exports of six heavy rare earth metals and rare earth magnets.

 

President Xi Jinping’s South East State Visit

Over a state dinner in Malaysia, Chinese President Xi Jinping called China a collaborative partner ready to stand with Southeast Asia amid tensions over trade. During his five-day state visit to Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia—economies likely affected by U.S. tariffs—Xi pushed a message of free trade, regional unity, and economic cooperation. 

Backed by China’s manufacturing power and control over key rare earth exports, Beijing signed new deals, including a joint railway project with Vietnam and increased market access for Vietnamese goods. On the other hand, China has been expanding diplomatic outreach to Europe, Japan, and South Korea to avoid isolation and stabilize supply chains. While the U.S. enters the trade war from a defiant economic position, China has been quietly preparing for years—leveraging diplomacy, trade, and strategic resources to counter U.S. hegemony in the trade.

How Much on What? 

The newly announced US tariffs represent one of the most aggressive trade actions in recent years. This has hard-hitting consequences for consumers as well as businesses. Aimed primarily at curbing Chinese imports and boosting domestic production, the tariff hike impacts a wide range of  products—from essential medical supplies to electronics and garments. As per The New York Times, the updated tariff structure includes some eye-popping figures: syringes and needles face a massive 245% tariff – while lithium-ion batteries are hit with 173%. Even seafood like squid isn’t spared, slapped with a 170% tariff. Clothing items such as woolen sweaters now carry a 169% tariff, and household goods like plastic dishes and toasters are taxed at 159% and 150% respectively.

High-tech and electronics items also take a hit. Electric vehicles are subject to a 148% tariff, toys and puzzles at 145%, and semiconductors—critical for nearly all modern devices—are taxed at 70%. Even daily-use items like aluminum foil (75%), car wheels (73%), and door hinges (67%) are affected. Even Laptops, now carry a 20% tariff.

A 245-percent tariff will make it impossible for China to sell to its largest market – the costs on both economies will be unimaginably high. But China is defiant and ready to fight whatever Washington announces.  China under Xi Jinping has indeed mastered the art of  negotiating trade terms and diplomacy, leveraging both strategic diplomacy and economic muscle to its advantage.

China’s diversification away from U.S. agricultural products extends well beyond soybeans, encompassing a broad range of farm goods and other key commodities. Amid trade war, Beijing’s strategic move involves shifting import sources, boosting domestic production, and employing trade and regulatory measures to reduce reliance on the U.S. and enhance food and energy security.

China has systematically reduced imports of several major U.S. agricultural products by sourcing from alternative countries and increasing domestic output:

 

 

Corn and Sorghum: China has sharply cut U.S. corn imports, which fell from $2.6 billion in 2023 to $561 million in 2024, while increasing purchases from Brazil, which has become China’s top corn supplier. Sorghum is also imported as a corn substitute, often from countries other than the US.

Meat and Poultry: Imports of U.S. beef, pork, and poultry have been curtailed significantly, with Beijing imposing tariffs and non-tariff barriers. For example,  beef and poultry exports from the US to China have been halted or sharply reduced through these measures. China has also increased domestic livestock production and diversified meat imports from other markets.

Wheat and Barley: China imports wheat and barley partly for animal feed, with barley imports rising due to its use in feed and brewing. 

In a strategic move, Beijing has diversified cotton imports. Vegetable oil sourcing from Russia and other countries have also been part of this diversification strategy. Imports of dairy items and aquatic goods have been affected by tariffs and trade policies immensely. China is booting up domestic production and sourcing from alternative suppliers to reduce dependency on the  U.S.

Fruits and Vegetables are also included in China’s tariff hikes and import levies on U.S. products, encouraging diversification toward other countries.

 

A colorful wicker basket filled with fresh grapes, bananas, and apples on a wooden table.

China is increasing LNG imports from Russia, Qatar, Australia, and Malaysia while sharply reducing U.S. LNG imports due to tariffs and trade barriers. For instance, no U.S. LNG was imported in March 2025, with Russian LNG exports to China rising by 3.3% in 2024.

Crude Oil and Natural Gas: China sources crude oil mainly from Saudi Arabia and Russia, and natural gas from multiple countries to avoid dependence on any single supplier or route, enhancing energy security.

Since 2018, China has imposed retaliatory tariffs on about $21 billion worth of U.S. agricultural and food products, including soybeans, corn, sorghum, wheat, meat, aquatic products, cotton, fruit, dairy, and vegetables.

Food Security Laws: Implementation of robust food security laws aims at reducing waste and increasing domestic production capacity to lessen import dependence.

China has strengthened import arrangements with countries like Brazil, Russia, and others in Latin America and Asia to replace U.S. agricultural products and energy supplies.

 

The U.S.–China trade war under President Donald Trump has reached  a turning point in global trade. The 245 percent tariff on Chinese goods shows the U.S. taking a strong stand to protect its industries and adjust the trade deficit. But China is not backing down. Instead, it’s roaring loudly. From the domains like food and energy to key materials across high-value sectors as well as essential ones, China is working to build long-term strength. This trade conflict is not just about numbers or tariffs -it is about setting the rules of the game in geoeconomics.

[ Ayanangsha Maitra is New Delhi based Editor, Contents, COGGS] 

Watch Related COGGS Discussion  and Subscribe to the YouTube channel

 

Prez Trump’s Tariff to Reframe Global Commerce? Read Post »

Transition in Syria : COGGS Advisor Explains Regime Change, Russo-Chinese Realignment

|

In a recent panel discussion in New Delhi, COGGS Advisor and acclaimed journalist Atul Aneja provided an analysis of the multifaceted web of regime changes, geopolitical upheavals, and developing global power dynamics. Speaking at India’s oldest state-administered (autonomous ) think-tank Indian Council for World Affairs, Aneja traced the roots of regime change in Syria strategies back to the collapse of the Soviet Union, which marked the beginning of a unipolar world order. He explained that this era saw the proliferation of regime change tactics such as colour revolutions and interventions facilitated by organizations like the USA based agencies like National Endowment for Democracy and USAID. He highlighted Yugoslavia’s breakup under the 42nd President Bill Clinton administration of the USA as the first successful experiment in this strategy, setting a precedent for similar actions in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, as well as North Africa.

 

Addressing the assembly of foreign policy observers in India’s capital, the China and Middle East specialist  emphasized that these movements often masqueraded as grassroots democratic uprisings but were, in reality, geopolitically motivated interventions. Aneja further shared his experience as a journalist in Cairo during the Arab Spring, where he uncovered connections between movements like Egypt’s April 6th Youth Movement and external training programs in Serbia. These programs taught activists techniques for peaceful protests and resistance against state repression, facilitated by west-headquartered organizations such as Freedom House.

Turning Points: Libya and Syria

Libya’s 2011 uprising as a pivotal moment in regime change history. The NATO-led intervention that toppled Lybian President Muammar Gaddafi signified a shift in global power dynamics. However, Syria marked a turning point where Russia and China began actively resisting regime change efforts. Aneja argued that their vetoes against no-fly zones in Syria represented their first line of defense against Western-led interventions aimed at reshaping Eurasia.

He went on to explain that Syria’s survival was critical to preventing further destabilization in the region. The failure to achieve regime change in Syria during 2011-2012 eventually culminated in Bashar al-Assad’s consolidation of power.

Messianic Ideologies , Tensions and Russia’s Reaction 

Aneja explained the ideological transformations within Israel and Iran, describing them as two messianic powers locked in competition. He expressed concerns about Israel’s evolving vision under Netanyahu’s leadership, which aligns with plans for a “Greater Israel” driven by radical ideologies. Similarly, Iran’s Shia beliefs about the return of the Mahdi shape its geopolitical strategies.

He emphasized that although Russia’s offer of Iran a nuclear umbrella could prevent direct conflict, it also runs the risk of escalating tensions into a world war in the event that Iran is attacked.

The Emerging Powers

According to Aneja, the importance of emerging economies like India and China in making reconciliation and balance in West Asia. He advocated for a shift away from Eurocentric diplomacy toward inclusive processes involving civilizational states. He further called for imaginative solutions within a multipolar world framework to address crises like those in Syria.

Atul Aneja’s insights offer a nuanced understanding of how historical events influence current geopolitical developments. His emphasis on inclusive diplomacy highlights opportunities for emerging powers to play a greater role in shaping global future. During his speech, the veteran journalist aptly stated, “Every crisis has a big opportunity,” signaling hope for constructive engagement amidst ongoing regional transformations.

Read Similar: Syria: Reincarnation or Revision? 

[ The views expressed are solely those of the individual and do not represent the views, policies, or positions of COGGS in any capacity. Pls write to us for event briefs/ article submissions and Impact Paper queries: ayan@thegeoeconomics.com ]

Transition in Syria : COGGS Advisor Explains Regime Change, Russo-Chinese Realignment Read Post »

Global South, NATO, USAID and Trump’s Policy: Prez Reagan’s Aide Scot Faulkner

|

Ayanangsha Maitra

In a recent interview with COGGS, Scot Faulkner, a former aide to President Reagan and Chief Administrative Officer at the House of Representatives, provided insightful commentary on the current and potential future direction of American foreign policy, particularly under a returning Trump administration. Faulkner contrasted the US President Donald Trump’s approach, which he characterises as “America First” and somewhat isolationist, with the deeply ideological and strategically consistent approach of Reagan.

Key Foreign Policy Challenges and Trump’s Potential Responses

On Iran and Venezuela: Faulkner believes the Biden administration’s national security team was very weak, creating opportunities for adversaries. He suggests Trump will likely seek to shut down Iran due to its funding of terrorism and focus on reciprocal trade. Faulkner also raised the possibility of India developing internal energy sources like converting “Napa” into fuel to avoid underwriting these regimes. He indicated that energy is a significant driver of foreign policy for both India and the US. Iran and Venezuela are the two countries, nation like India used to heavily rely on oil imports but stopped import due to sanction concerns.

 

China: Faulkner views China as “Enemy Number One,” aiming for global dominance through economic and cultural means or potentially through military aggression. He suggested Trump might work with industry to bring manufacturing back to the US or out of China through tariff threats.

NATO: Calling himself  a “big fan of NATO,” Faulkner acknowledged concerns about it losing its “heart”. He recalled his involvement in expanding NATO, particularly with Baltic countries seeking to cleanse themselves of Soviet oppression. He believes NATO remains crucial as a counterforce to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ambitions to rebuild the Soviet empire. According to him, President Putin, if given the opportunity, would take over Moldova and the Baltics and intimidate Poland. He sees NATO as the primary force to deter such actions, especially if Trump scales back US involvement.

President Ronald Reagan and Scot M. Faulkner. Photo shared with Ayanangsha Maitra.

The Global South: Faulkner is critical of the vast sums spent on aid through USAID since its inception in 1962, questioning whether it has led to significant positive change in many recipient countries, often still characterised by dictatorships and left-leaning strongmen. He argues that China has effectively gained influence in Africa and is attempting to do the same in South America by engaging with leaders and oligarchs. The American realpolitik thinker suggests a reassessment of US aid to ensure a better “return on investment,” moving away from ideologically driven projects towards more business-oriented approaches to counter Chinese influence. He cited his experience with the Peace Corps in Malawi as an example of well-run programs that can positively impact individuals and build goodwill.

Domestic Focus

Faulkner indicated that while Trump is bringing a “real strategy,” much of it is “isolationist based” and “America Focus based“. This domestic focus is driven by issues like the southern border, which Faulkner described as a major concern for voters due to the influence of Mexican cartels. He noted Trump’s designation of cartels as terrorist organisations and potential actions like drone strikes in Mexico to address the issue. Faulkner believes Trump’s initial focus will be on making America safe and secure domestically before potentially shifting back to a more outward focus.

Despite the perception of Trump’s unpredictability, Faulkner identified “America First” as a consistent theme. He believes securing the southern border and addressing domestic security issues will be key priorities for Trump’s administration.

 

Faulkner remarked the “revolving door” phenomenon where bureaucrats and diplomats transition to academia or think tanks after leaving government in the US. While he supports conservative think tanks as a counterbalance, he noted that left-leaning figures often receive lucrative book deals, think tank positions, or media gigs. He further stated that he advised the Trump transition team to pull security clearances from individuals who he believed had acted improperly, as these clearances hold significant financial value. His remarks suggest a significant divergence in foreign policy approaches between President Reagan and a returning President Trump. While Reagan operated within a well-defined ideological framework, Trump’s “America First” agenda prioritises domestic concerns and a more transactional approach to international relations.

Global South, NATO, USAID and Trump’s Policy: Prez Reagan’s Aide Scot Faulkner Read Post »

Scroll to Top