Nations increasingly use sanctions and tariffs as weapons, risking a destructive race to the bottom. A new international doctrine is needed to establish rules of engagement for economic statecraft, much like the Geneva Conventions govern military conflict, to preserve the global economy.
The post-1980s neoliberal consensus of small government and free trade is being replaced by a mercantilist approach. Governments, particularly the U.S., now actively intervene to protect domestic industries and secure geopolitical strength, treating trade as a zero-sum game. This represents a fundamental economic shift for investors.
From China's perspective, producing more than it needs and exporting at cutthroat prices is a strategic tool, not an economic problem. This form of industrial warfare is designed to weaken other nations' manufacturing bases, prioritizing geopolitical goals over profit.
The concept of 'weaponized interdependence,' highlighted by China's use of export controls, is driving Asian nations like Japan, India, and South Korea to implement economic security acts. This shifts investment toward domestic supply chains in critical minerals, semiconductors, and defense, creating state-backed opportunities.
Modern global conflict is primarily economic, not kinetic. Nations now engage in strategic warfare through currency debasement, asset seizures, and manipulating capital flows. The objective is to inflict maximum financial damage on adversaries, making economic policy a primary weapon of war.
As economic tools like sanctions become primary weapons in global competition, the U.S. should develop a formal doctrine with limiting principles, similar to military rules of engagement, to govern their use and prevent a destructive "race to the bottom."
PGIM's Daleep Singh argues that the risk of mutually assured destruction prevents direct military conflict between nuclear powers. This channels confrontation into the economic sphere, using tools like sanctions and trade policy as primary weapons of statecraft.
Unlike previous administrations that used trade policy for domestic economic goals, Trump's approach is distinguished by his willingness to wield tariffs as a broad geopolitical weapon against allies and adversaries alike, from Canada to India.
Each time the U.S. uses financial sanctions, it demonstrates the risks of relying on the dollar system. This incentivizes adversaries like Russia and China to accelerate the development of parallel financial infrastructure, weakening the dollar's long-term network effect and dominance.
The post-Cold War era of stability is over. The world is returning to an 'Old Normal' where great power conflict plays out in the economic arena. This new state is defined by fiscal dominance, weaponized supply chains, and structurally higher inflation, risk premia, and volatility.
Far from being a precise tool against China, recent US tariffs act as a blunt instrument that harms America's own interests. They tax raw materials and machine tools needed for domestic production and hit allies harder than adversaries. This alienates partners, disrupts supply chains, and pushes the world towards a 'World Minus One' economic coalition excluding the US.