Group 1 - European countries have shown a significant shift in their stance towards U.S. proposals, particularly regarding tariffs on China, indicating a newfound assertiveness in international trade discussions [1][3] - The automotive industry in Europe heavily relies on the Chinese market, with over 10% of exports linked to it, highlighting the economic interdependence between Europe and China [9] - Europe's refusal to support U.S. tariffs against China is driven by self-interest, as aligning with U.S. policies could harm European businesses and economic interests [9] Group 2 - The U.S. is attempting to shift domestic economic blame onto China, using tariffs as a political tool to distract from its own economic challenges [5] - China's proactive measures, such as expanding domestic demand and diversifying trade partnerships, have positioned it to withstand external pressures, including U.S. tariffs [13] - The recent developments signal a potential shift in international relations, with countries increasingly recognizing their interconnected interests and moving away from U.S. hegemony [13]

Group 1: US-China Trade Relations - The US and China have agreed to extend the suspension of tariffs for 90 days, which is seen as a move to ease trade tensions and stabilize the macroeconomic environment in China [1][9] - The bilateral trade volume between the US and China is projected to exceed $680 billion in 2024, indicating deep interconnections across various sectors [3] - Despite a 21.7% year-on-year decline in exports to the US, China's overall export growth has accelerated, reflecting a shift in trade patterns due to high tariffs [4] Group 2: Brazil's Trade Dynamics - Brazilian President Lula has expressed concerns over US tariffs on Brazilian exports, which have been increased by 50%, and has sought support from China to counteract US pressure [6][7] - Lula's administration is pursuing a multilateral approach to address trade disputes, including filing complaints with the World Trade Organization against US tariffs [6] - The cooperation between China and Brazil is strengthened by their shared interests in opposing unilateral trade practices and promoting a multipolar world [7][9] Group 3: Global Trade Environment - The current trade landscape is characterized by increasing resistance to unilateralism and protectionism, as evidenced by the responses from China and Brazil to US tariff policies [9] - The next 90 days will involve continued negotiations between the US and China, with potential discussions on various trade-related issues, although significant reductions in tariffs are unlikely [3][9] - The evolving international trade dynamics emphasize the importance of multilateral cooperation in addressing global economic challenges [9]

Core Viewpoint - The article argues that the U.S. tariff policy undermines the principles of international trade order and uses trade as a coercive tool, urging global South countries to seek multilateral cooperation opportunities [1] Trade Policy Impact - The U.S. imposes a 30% tariff on South African goods, despite South Africa accounting for only 0.25% of total U.S. imports [1] - The high tariffs on South African exports are attributed to power dynamics rather than economic or trade factors [1] Multilateralism and Cooperation - The article highlights that the frequent use of tariffs by the U.S. sets a dangerous precedent, leading to the collapse of multilateralism as trade becomes a tool of coercion rather than cooperation [1] - South Africa and other nations have historically viewed Western markets as stable and rule-based, but the current U.S. approach is arbitrary [1] Regional Trade Relations - South African President Ramaphosa supports expanding trade relations with Africa, Asia, and the Middle East [1] - The African Continental Free Trade Agreement is expected to integrate Africa into a market valued at $3.4 trillion [1]

Group 1 - The core issue between China and the US revolves around trade negotiations, with recent developments indicating a lack of genuine willingness to compromise from the US side [1][11] - The US Treasury Secretary's comments suggest a strong stance on trade negotiations, reflecting internal economic pressures in the US, including a record national debt exceeding $37 trillion [1][9] - The US's demands, particularly regarding fentanyl smuggling and rare earth exports, highlight a one-sided approach that fails to acknowledge China's existing regulatory measures and market dominance [3][4] Group 2 - China's response to US demands has been firm, with significant increases in the crackdown on illegal trade and a clear stance on protecting its resource sovereignty [4][8] - The trade dynamics for soybeans show a decrease in imports from the US, as China diversifies its sources, indicating a shift in purchasing strategies [4][6] - Energy cooperation between China and Russia is emphasized, with China increasing its oil imports from Russia, contrasting with US pressure to halt such purchases [5][8] Group 3 - The upcoming 90 days are seen as a critical period for both nations, with China showing resilience and strategic planning in its trade relationships, particularly with emerging markets [9][11] - The overall competition between China and the US is framed as a struggle for control over global supply chains, with China leveraging its market size and industrial capabilities [11] - The rejection of US demands by China signifies a broader resistance to the politicization of trade issues and unilateral sanctions, advocating for a more balanced approach to negotiations [11]

Group 1 - Modi's speech during India's Independence Day emphasized a strong stance against US-India trade tensions, particularly in response to Trump's tariff threats, asserting that India will not compromise its national interests [1] - The core reason for Modi's firm attitude is Trump's aggressive tariff demands and unacceptable requests, particularly regarding agricultural market access, which threatens the livelihoods of approximately 42% of India's population [2][3] - Modi's government is politically constrained from yielding to Trump's demands due to the potential backlash from domestic farmers, a crucial voter base [3] Group 2 - India has taken countermeasures, such as canceling the defense minister's visit to the US and pausing planned military purchases, which could impact US economic interests [3] - Modi is actively seeking international support through multilateral cooperation, focusing on organizations like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to mitigate the negative effects of US tariffs [5] - The strategy of strengthening ties with other nations is aimed at enhancing India's negotiating position with the US, indicating a potential temporary shift in foreign policy [7] Group 3 - Modi's actions not only seek to gain international support but also aim to showcase his leadership domestically, thereby maintaining political stability amid external pressures [9]

新华财经开普敦8月18日电（记者王雷王晓梅）南非独立在线新闻网站日前刊登金砖问题专家克洛埃·马 卢莱克的文章说，美国关税政策打破了国际贸易秩序中尊重规则的原则，将贸易当作胁迫工具。全球南 方国家应共同努力，寻求多边合作机遇。文章摘要如下： 美国对南非输美商品征收30%的关税，而实际上，南非对美出口在美国进口商品总额中仅占0.25%。南 非输美商品被征高关税，与经济无关，与贸易无关，而与强权有关。美国频繁挥舞关税大棒的做法，开 启了危险先例。当贸易成为胁迫而不是合作工具时，多边主义的前提就开始崩溃。 长期以来，南非和许多国家制定贸易政策的前提是西方市场是"稳定的、理性的和基于规则的"。而如 今，美国的规则是任意的，伙伴关系——至少在特朗普政府的定义下——取决于默许和服从。 美国发动关税战让外界明确了一件事，那就是对美依赖是一种负担，真正的韧性在于融合、生产和自 决。全球南方国家应共同努力，寻求多边合作机遇。南非总统拉马福萨支持扩大与非洲、亚洲和中东的 贸易关系。同时，《非洲大陆自由贸易协定》也有望将非洲整合为价值3.4万亿美元的市场。 （文章来源：新华社） ...

Group 1 - The Italian government may impose restrictions on the shareholding ratio of Chinese investments in several Italian companies due to pressure from the U.S. government [1] - The U.S. has previously issued a "security warning" regarding an Italian tire company, claiming that Chinese technology in its products poses risks, potentially affecting its sales in the U.S. market [1] - The article criticizes the U.S. for politicizing economic issues and interfering in international trade relations, which disrupts global supply chains and undermines the development rights of other countries [1] Group 2 - China advocates for international economic cooperation based on open, transparent, and equal market rules, emphasizing non-interference in internal affairs and not targeting third parties [2] - Chinese investments in various countries, including Italy, have contributed to local economic development and expanded market opportunities, as seen in projects in Greece, Serbia, Africa, and Southeast Asia [2] - Countries under U.S. pressure are encouraged to maintain independent stances and make decisions based on facts and national interests to enhance their economic growth and global credibility [2] Group 3 - Economic globalization is an irreversible trend, and multilateral cooperation is essential to address current risks and challenges, opposing protectionism and promoting a fair international economic environment [3]

Group 1 - The article discusses the deteriorating relationship between India and the United States, highlighting India's response to increased tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, which raised tariffs on Indian goods to 50% [1][10] - Indian businesses are feeling the impact of these tariffs, with significant losses reported, such as the Farida Group, which has $114 million in frozen projects due to the tariff hike [1][10] - In contrast, the U.S. has shown favor towards Pakistan, granting lower tariffs and engaging in military cooperation, which has further strained India's position [3][5] Group 2 - The Indian government, led by Modi, has taken a firm stance against U.S. pressure, halting arms purchases from the U.S. and participating in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit hosted by China [5][7] - India's pivot towards Russia for energy and military cooperation has strengthened ties, as India continues to purchase Russian oil despite U.S. sanctions [5][7] - The article suggests that India's "de-Americanization" strategy may serve as a warning to other nations about the risks of U.S. hegemony, as countries seek alternative partnerships [10][8]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the increasing reliance on international trade for food consumption, particularly in China, Japan, and other regions, with projections indicating that 22% of calorie consumption will depend on global trade over the next decade [2][6]. Group 1: Trade Dynamics - The share of trade in major agricultural product output has risen from 16% in 2000 to 23% in the 2022-2024 period [4]. - Brazil's average net export value is projected to be $70.3 billion for 2022-2024, doubling from ten years ago, while the U.S. will see a 22% increase to $45.4 billion [6]. - China's average net import value is expected to reach $98.2 billion, which is 3.2 times higher than a decade ago, indicating a significant increase in import dependency [6]. Group 2: Consumption Trends - China's imports of wheat are growing at an annual rate of 18%, corn at 30%, beef at 25%, and pork at 10%, reflecting a shift in dietary structure from grains to meat [6]. - In contrast, Japan's net import value remains stable at $26.3 billion, while Western European countries have reduced their net imports by 42% through increased domestic production [6]. Group 3: Future Projections - The gap between net exporting and importing regions is expected to widen over the next decade, with cross-border food trade projected to account for 22% of overall calorie consumption [6]. - By 2034, China's consumption of staple foods like wheat and rice is expected to increase by 2%, while India and Africa will see increases of 19% and 29%, respectively, positioning them as future drivers of global grain consumption [8]. - The article emphasizes the need for multilateral cooperation and a rules-based agricultural trade system, especially in light of the disruptions caused by tariff policies [8].

Group 1 - The G7 summit revealed a significant tension regarding U.S. tariffs on China, with U.S. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin's proposal for a 200% secondary tariff on China met with silence from allies [1][3] - The U.S. is attempting to rally allies against China by proposing extreme tariffs on countries engaging in energy trade with Russia, specifically targeting China [3] - China's response to U.S. tariffs has been assertive, implementing countermeasures such as tariffs on U.S. agricultural products and technology, indicating a readiness to retaliate against perceived threats [5][7] Group 2 - European economies are heavily reliant on Chinese supply chains, with over 60% of industrial imports coming from China, making them vulnerable to U.S. tariff policies [7][8] - The U.S. has also imposed tariffs on European goods, causing distress among European manufacturers and prompting calls for unity to protect European interests [8][10] - Trust between the U.S. and its European allies has deteriorated due to inconsistent U.S. trade policies and threats, leading to concerns about the impact of tariffs on employment and competitiveness in Europe [10][12] Group 3 - The silence from G7 members during the tariff discussions indicates a shift in European attitudes towards U.S. unilateralism, with some countries seeking closer ties with China [12][14] - The current geopolitical landscape suggests that economic rationality may prevail over political coercion, as countries prioritize their economic survival and strategic dignity [14][15] - Analysts suggest that the self-damage from U.S. tariffs may outweigh any benefits, highlighting the unsustainable nature of aggressive tariff policies [15]