A clear sign of the breakdown in global trade consensus was the collapse of a major environmental goods agreement. The entire deal, involving 250 products, failed because China and the EU could not agree on whether to include bicycles, demonstrating the system's inability to resolve even minor disputes.
Related Insights
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.
The absence of Home Depot's popular giant Santa decoration is not a simple inventory issue but a direct result of the US-China trade war. This illustrates how high-level geopolitics creates specific product shortages and fuels high-markup secondary markets on platforms like eBay.
The current US-India tariff situation is a stable deadlock. The US can easily replace Indian imports, and India can absorb the minor GDP impact (30-80 basis points). This lack of urgency on either side suggests a prolonged standoff rather than a quick resolution.
Beyond the US-China rivalry, a new front is opening between Brussels and Beijing. Incidents like the French suspension of fashion retailer Shein are not isolated but symptomatic of growing European mistrust and a willingness to take action. This signals a potential fracturing of global trade blocs and increased regulatory risk for Chinese firms in the EU.
When trade policies force allies like Canada to find new partners, it's not a temporary shift. They build new infrastructure and relationships that won't be abandoned even if the political climate changes. The trust is broken, making the economic damage long-lasting and difficult to repair.
The traditional relationship where economic performance dictated political outcomes has flipped. Now, political priorities like tariff policies, reshoring, and populist movements are the primary drivers of economic trends, creating a more unpredictable environment for investors.
The shift away from the post-Cold War trade system started well before Trump. As early as 2009, the Obama administration recognized that the Doha Round framework was unworkable with China's economic model and began warning Beijing that the 'benign international environment' it relied on was at risk.
Beyond raw materials, China's national ambition is to achieve near-total self-sufficiency. The prevailing mood is that there is "nothing for which it wants to rely on foreigners a single day longer than it has to." This philosophy of aggressive import substitution signals a fundamental break with the logic of reciprocal global trade.
Globalism was highly successful, lifting millions from poverty. Its failure wasn't the concept itself, but the lack of strategic boundaries. By allowing critical supply chains (like microchips and steel) to move offshore for cost savings, nations sacrificed sovereignty and created vulnerabilities that are now causing a predictable backlash.
The latest US-China trade talks signal a shift from unilateral US pressure to a negotiation between equals. China is now effectively using its control over critical exports, like rare earth minerals, as a bargaining chip to compel the U.S. to pause its own restrictions on items like semiconductors.
