21st Century Warfare: Tariffs & Madness
- Brian
- Aug 30
- 5 min read
Article Type: Fact & Opinion
Disclaimer: This article contains a mixture of facts, supported by 3rd party references, and constructive opinions of the author. These are meant to be done in a thought-provoking and non-confrontational way. If you disagree, that’s okay, just be kind in your responses.
With the stroke of a pen, the war began. Not a war against known enemies, but against allies, neighbors, and enemies alike. This is the first war in history where a singular country has declared against virtually the entire world all at once. While the intention behind the actions may be justified, the method in which it is being implemented has sent shockwaves around the globe. That pen stroke signed an executive order implementing the first of many tariffs in an aggressive fashion much like a schoolyard bully goes after people without giving them a chance to find a better resolution.
Some were shocked, like I was. Others brushed the tariffs off like another bad moment in President Trump’s day. Others cheered. Whatever side you’re on is irrelevant. The key to all of this isn’t the fundamental facts, it’s the method of execution: sudden, swift, and against allies.;
What was the justification used for implementing the tariffs?
Canada: Punishing tariffs meant to curb fentanyl.
Mexico: Curb illegal immigration, drugs, and close loopholes used by other countries to fit in with U.S.M.C.A..
China: Curb illegal drugs (flowing via Canada), re-align duty & tariffs to be similar between the countries.
Not only were the justifications above used, but President Trump openly said it was also to make the U.S. rich again. Most nations around the world already view the U.S. as rich, and I’m sure did not take these words well. These tariffs, originally intended to protect American manufacturing and trade interests, are now being recognized for their long-term, destabilizing effects on the U.S. economy and its standing on the global stage. The ruling is a clear signal that the strategies employed by former President Donald Trump in his trade wars will continue to have lasting consequences—especially for American consumers, businesses, and international relations.
What Could Have Been Done Instead?
Instead of implementing swift and immediate tariffs – especially on allies – the U.S. government could have, and should have, taken a calmer approach
As made clear by a French politician’s request for the Statue of Liberty back, these actions have left the world a more unstable and uncertain place than ever before.
While the Trump administration’s strategy of using tariffs as a negotiating tool might have had the immediate appearance of strength, it overlooked a key element of successful international trade policy: diplomacy. Instead of creating a pathway for thoughtful, cooperative solutions, Trump’s approach was often characterized by aggressive, unilateral action, which strained relationships with both allies and adversaries.
A more effective approach could have been one that prioritized dialogue and collaboration with U.S. trading partners, both big and small. Rather than impose tariffs on China and other countries in a bid to extract trade concessions, the U.S. could have worked to outline what a more balanced trade environment would look like for each country and engaged in transparent negotiations. This would have allowed time for countries to work through diplomatic channels and potentially avoid the retaliatory trade wars that followed.
For example, instead of unilaterally taxing Chinese imports, the U.S. could have approached China directly, identifying areas where its trade practices were indeed unfair (such as intellectual property theft) and proposing targeted reforms. Likewise, the tariffs imposed on close allies like Canada and the European Union could have been avoided through diplomatic engagement, which would have focused on addressing shared concerns about trade imbalances and unfair practices. Rather than isolating these partners, the U.S. could have worked alongside them to build a multilateral approach to trade reform.
This more cooperative path would have preserved the trust and good will of America’s long-standing allies, all while creating a more sustainable, balanced trade system. Instead, the Trump administration’s “America First” policy often came across as coercive and undermined the international norms of free and fair trade. It created an “us vs. them” mentality, which, in the long run, damaged U.S. relationships with countries that were once key partners.
Today’s Decision, Tomorrow’s Impact
The result is already clear: allies are stunned and instantly have lost faith in the United States. Many are rightfully refusing to be bullied into submission.
One of the most alarming long-term effects of the Trump tariffs was the erosion of the U.S. dollar’s position in the global economy. Throughout the 20th century, the dollar had served as the world’s primary reserve currency. But the implementation of tariffs, particularly on China, began to undermine confidence in the U.S. as a stable economic leader. Countries that had long relied on trade with the U.S. found themselves diversifying their holdings, turning to other currencies such as the euro or the Chinese yuan.
Additionally, as the U.S. engaged in increasingly protectionist policies, American financial markets became more volatile. The uncertainty surrounding trade relations led to swings in currency values, and businesses faced rising costs that led to slower growth. While short-term economic gains were promised by the Trump administration, the long-term reality of tariffs has been the slow erosion of the dollar’s strength in international markets.
In the aftermath of the court ruling in 2025, this trend appears likely to accelerate. If the U.S. is unable to reverse the damage done by these tariffs, there is a real possibility that the country could lose its position as the center of the global economy—a situation that would have profound implications for its financial future.
Another critical consequence of the Trump tariffs has been the strain placed on U.S. alliances. During the Trump administration, traditional allies such as Canada, Mexico, Japan, and the European Union were subjected to tariffs that undermined longstanding economic partnerships. These tariffs were justified on the grounds of national security or economic fairness, but in practice, they alienated key international allies and raised doubts about the U.S.'s commitment to the post-World War II economic order.
For example, the Trump administration’s decision to impose steel and aluminum tariffs on the European Union was met with outrage, as the EU is one of America’s oldest and most reliable allies. Similarly, relations with Canada, a close neighbor and trading partner, became tense as both sides engaged in tit-for-tat tariff impositions. While Trump’s “America First” approach to trade was framed as an attempt to protect U.S. industries, the tariffs weakened diplomatic ties with countries that had been historically aligned with the U.S.
In the wake of the court ruling, there is hope that future administrations will work to repair these frayed alliances. However, the damage done over several years will not be easily undone. Trust has been eroded, and many countries are now more inclined to look elsewhere for trade partners who may offer more stability and fewer trade barriers.
As we look forward, my only hope is that calmer heads prevail and the United States resumes treating allies as such, while finding more constructive ways to deal with adversaries.
Comments