In one day the market lost $ 3 trillion, the dollar and oil decreased and confidence decreased. April 3, it was not an ordinary day in the world’s markets. US President Donald Trump threw a heavy stone in the waters of the global stagnant economy; Represented by wide customs tariffs that were not excluded even the closest allies such as Canada, Germany, Japan and Jordan. Only one step was enough to ignite panic in the markets, and analyzes describing what happened as a “economic earthquake.”
This measure has left a global turmoil that has not been seen in the financial crisis in 2008. But from this earthquake, greater questions arise: Did Trump made the most dangerous economic decision in his second term? Or does it move global chess pieces as part of a brilliant plan under the slogan “mutual fair trade”?
Reading in numbers
From the moment the decision was announced, the global financial markets were bound, and American stock indicators recorded the worst performance for one day since March 2020, with losses of about 3 trillion dollars. The US dollar index also decreased by 2.1%, which is the largest daily decline since November 2022. In the bond market, the return on treasury bonds has decreased for 10 years by 13 basis points, in reference to investors escaping towards safe assets. As for US oil prices, they recorded a decline of 6.6%, which is the worst since 2022.
These combined indicators reflect the size of the anxiety planted by the decision in the markets, and raise serious questions about its short and medium -term feasibility.
In the scale … clear risks
Although the US President’s decision came within the framework of a political speech promoting “fair trade” and “protecting national interests”, his direct consequences sparked a series of economic warnings. The markets do not deal with symbolic messages, but with real indicators. The following are the most prominent potential risks that put this decision in the major risk field, and perhaps the strategic error:
1- Decision of confidence in the American economy:
The market reaction shows that investors interpreted Trump’s decision as a sign of weakness. Instead of strengthening confidence in the American economy, definitions have raised fears of a global economic slowdown that might bounce on the United States itself.
2- The danger of a comprehensive trade war:
Modern history shows that commercial wars do not win any country easily. The expected reactions from China and the European Union, and perhaps the countries of the south, may lead to a wave of counter -fees, which may be drowned by the global economy in a cycle of contraction and open confrontation.
3- damage to allies and partners:
Insert allied countries such as Europe, Japan and Arab countries such as Egypt, Jordan and Morocco within these definitions raises strategic questions about the consistency of American policy. Jordan, for example, has exported approximately 25% of its exports to the American market, will be severely affected, and this weakens the economy of a partner and stable country in an already unstable area.
Trump’s bets
Despite extensive criticism, the decision supporters believe that the definitions are not a goal in itself, but rather a broad negotiating tool. From this perspective, Trump’s move can be understood as part of a strategy aimed at protecting the American economy and rearranging global trade rules to serve his long -term interests. The following list of Trump’s proofs:
1- Sutting pressure paper:
Some may see that Trump follows the “shock first, negotiating” style. The aim of the definitions is not necessarily installed, but rather to use them as a pressure tool to reformulate trade relations on new conditions, especially with China and the European Union.
2- Protecting local industries:
Some American industries, such as steel and electronics, have long suffered from cheap foreign competition. These definitions may give them an opportunity to restructure and create local job opportunities, a message that may be mainly directed at Trump’s electoral base.
3- Restructuring the global supply chains:
These new definitions may push American companies to restore part of their production to the American interior. This proposal reflects a desire to reduce dependence on the outside and enhance “economic sovereignty”, especially after the Cofide-19 crisis lessons.
Profit and loss accounts
It can be said that the final judgment on the decision cannot be issued from the first day. But until now, the direct losses are clear and documented, while the possible gains remain hostage to political and diplomatic negotiation, and it is necessary that the opponents do not escalate to retaliatory measures.
Perhaps the real danger lies in the move from an American pressure tool to an open Saddam strategy in the international community, which may lead the world into a deep economic crisis, and perhaps to a division in the global commercial system in favor of competitors such as China and the BRICS group.
Trump’s move may be understood by imposing wide customs tariffs as part of a harsh negotiating strategy, but it came at a high instant cost and long -term risks. In the balance of the economy, confidence and stability remains more important than slogans, and just as global integration is stronger than isolationist tendency.
Whether the decision is right or wrong, what will judge its result is the ability to convert pressure into gains without dumping the ship in which everyone sits.
Perhaps the most important thing that Al Ain can see here is that President Trump put his hand in a global economy engine built by the United States itself in the wake of its great profit after the Second World War, as it moved from just a regional player behind the oceans to the head of a global empire that has decided to decide the fate of the world since then.
