pull down to refresh

U.S. tariffs wear the cloak of financial policy to address trade imbalances, but they mask deeper geopolitical ambitions. That strategy may backfire. The pressure of U.S. tariffs is firming up the multipolar world it is meant to prevent.
Pressure from sanctions has already fused Iran even tighter with Russia and Saudi Arabia. It is now, stunningly, contributing to the birth of relations with Egypt, a Middle Eastern power with whom Iran has had broken relations since 1979.
In 2024, Iran and Egypt both became members of BRICS, a large and growing international organization whose primary purpose is to balance U.S. hegemony in the new multipolar world. …
And Brazil is not alone. The United States is using tariffs to try to force India to choose sides, something the country, who is committed to multipolarity, is not likely to do. In the new multipolar world, nations do not have to choose between sides or line up consistently behind American hegemony. As India’s Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar explains, in a multipolar world, countries can deal “with contesting parties at the same time with optimal results” for their “own self-interest.” The U.S. has placed 25% tariffs on India’s exports to the United States. But it does not stop there. India will be hit with an additional 100% tariff if they refuse to stop purchasing Russian oil. Russia is the top supplier of oil to India, accounting for 35% of its imports, and that amount is increasing.
Rubio made the need to choose sides clear when he said that India “buys its oil from Russia…And that—unfortunately that is helping to sustain the Russian war effort. So it is most certainly a point of irritation in our relationship with India.” Stephen Miller, deputy White House chief of staff, said that Trump has said very clearly “that it is not acceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing the oil from Russia.”
Despite the pressure to fall back in line with U.S. hegemony, India has made it clear that they will continue to purchase oil from Russia. India’s foreign ministry says, “The government is committed to prioritizing the welfare of Indian consumers. Our energy purchases will be based on price, availability and market conditions.” Tellingly, India’s foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said India has a “steady and time-tested partnership” with Russia.
Like India, China is also being threatened with 100% tariffs on exports to the United States if they continue to buy Russian oil. And like their BRICS partners in India and Brazil, China is refusing America’s attempts to enforce its hegemony. China has responded that it is a sovereign nation and that it will purchase its oil in accord with its own internal policies. Asked about the U.S. warning and the consequence of disobeying, China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Guo Jiakun replied, “China will take energy supply measures that are right for China based on our national interests. Tariff wars have no winners. Coercion and pressuring cannot solve problems. China will firmly safeguard its own sovereignty, security and development interests.”
BRICS has long said that they oppose alliances and blocs and that they are against no one. But hostile U.S. pressure against many countries is building BRICS. American attempts to maintain its hegemony through the weaponization of the economy may be having the opposite effect, exerting pressure that is fusing the multipolar world more firmly together.
Just wondering, don’t these idiots consider blowback in any of their plans? Isn’t it plain to see and understand that people just do not like being coerced? And when they are coerced too often and too heavily, that they revolt and do the opposite of the desired outcome? I thought this was something that was within everybody’s everyday experience with other people and entities. So, what happened to our leaders? Were they too influenced by the scamming, singleminded NeoCons?
Empires tend to be the last to realize that their power has waned.
reply
You’re right! My real beef is with thea all-knowing agencies and the state totally ignoring any possibility of blowback and what that may mean to everybody but the leaders and agencies themselves. Of course, they never feel the blowback themselves, personally, because they are so insulated from reality. Just for once, to see the blowback be concentrated on the deciders would be a positive pleasure.
reply