Trump’s Trade War: Alienating Allies While Empowering Adversaries
When Donald Trump speaks about global trade and geopolitics, he often frames himself as the defender of American interests against the threats posed by economic rivals, particularly the BRICS+ group of nations. Yet, as Jim O’Neill—the economist who first coined the term “BRICs” back in 2001—argues, Trump’s rhetoric and policies appear to be moving in opposite directions. While his words suggest resistance to the BRICS+ challenge, his actions may paradoxically strengthen the very coalition he claims to oppose.
Trump’s Rhetoric vs. Reality
On the surface, Trump presents himself as a warrior against the rise of China, the influence of Russia, and the ambitions of other emerging economies that are coalescing under the BRICS+ umbrella. His speeches warn against unfair trade practices, currency manipulation, and the geopolitical consequences of allowing these nations to gain leverage over global markets.
But O’Neill notes that the actual policies pursued under Trump’s renewed presidency tell a different story. Rather than weakening BRICS+, Trump’s economic strategies—especially his trade wars and selective protectionism—are alienating traditional U.S. allies while offering indirect breathing space to America’s rivals.
Alienating Friends
One of the most striking aspects of Trump’s trade agenda is how harshly it has targeted America’s closest allies. By imposing tariffs and threatening penalties on European goods, Japanese exports, and even Canadian industries, the U.S. has risked undermining decades of trust.
European leaders, already wary of Trump’s transactional approach to alliances, now find themselves questioning whether the United States remains a reliable partner. For countries like Germany, France, and Japan, the message is clear: Washington is willing to treat allies almost as harshly as adversaries in pursuit of short-term economic leverage.
This creates deep fissures within the Western-led global order, making it harder to present a unified front against countries like China and Russia. As O’Neill points out, a fragmented Western alliance only strengthens BRICS+ in its quest to present itself as an alternative global coalition.
Going Easy on Rivals
At the same time, Trump’s treatment of U.S. rivals has been surprisingly lenient in certain respects. For example:
- China: While Trump continues to use strong rhetoric against Beijing, his actual trade policies often avoid tackling the most structural issues—such as subsidies for state-owned enterprises or forced technology transfers. Instead, he leans on tariffs that hurt American consumers as much as Chinese producers.
- Russia: Trump’s stance toward Russia remains ambiguous. Despite Moscow’s aggressive moves in Eastern Europe and its alignment with BRICS+, Trump has shown a tendency to downplay sanctions or offer conciliatory gestures.
- Saudi Arabia & BRICS Newcomers: Trump’s willingness to prioritize transactional deals with Gulf nations, many of which are now aligned with BRICS+, underscores the inconsistency of his approach.
This mixture of hostility toward allies and half-measures toward adversaries makes Trump appear less like a strategist defending U.S. primacy and more like a disruptor inadvertently boosting BRICS+ cohesion.
The BRICS+ Opportunity
BRICS+, now expanded beyond its original five members, has been working to create alternative financial, trade, and governance structures outside Western dominance. Initiatives such as discussions around a BRICS reserve currency, the expansion of the New Development Bank, and cross-border payment systems demonstrate this ambition.
For BRICS+ leaders, Trump’s policies may provide the perfect opportunity. As the U.S. alienates its traditional partners, emerging economies can frame themselves as more reliable allies for countries seeking investment, infrastructure funding, or diversified trade routes.
Rather than deterring the rise of BRICS+, Trump’s trade wars and protectionism risk accelerating it.
The Irony of “America First”
The irony, O’Neill suggests, is that Trump’s brand of “America First” may ultimately weaken America’s global position. By treating allies like adversaries and adversaries like potential partners, he could erode the trust and cooperation that underpin U.S. global leadership.
Meanwhile, BRICS+—once dismissed by many Western analysts as a loose collection of mismatched economies—is gaining credibility as a political and economic force. Trump’s policies, intentionally or not, are nudging the world toward a multipolar order where the U.S. plays a less central role.
Trump’s presidency is often defined by contradictions: tough words followed by unpredictable actions. In the realm of trade and geopolitics, this contradiction may prove especially costly. By alienating friends while going easy on rivals, Trump risks reshaping the balance of global power in favor of BRICS+.
What O’Neill’s analysis makes clear is that leadership in the 21st century requires more than slogans and tariffs—it requires strategic foresight, consistency, and the ability to strengthen alliances rather than undermine them. Without these, America’s attempt to confront its challengers could backfire, leaving it weaker and its rivals stronger.
About The Author
