Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the concept of "dollar hegemony" and how the United States has maintained its dominance in the global economy through strategic monetary policies and military power over the past 80 years [1][10]. Group 1: Historical Context - After World War II, the U.S. emerged as the largest economic power, establishing a system where the dollar was pegged to gold, making it the center of global currency [3][5]. - In 1971, President Nixon decoupled the dollar from gold, transforming it into a fiat currency, yet the demand for dollars continued to grow due to strategic agreements [3][5]. Group 2: Oil Dollar System - The U.S. established a secret agreement with Middle Eastern oil producers, particularly Saudi Arabia, to sell oil exclusively in dollars, creating the "petrodollar" system [5][10]. - This system ensured that countries needed to acquire dollars to purchase oil, thereby increasing global demand for the currency [5][10]. Group 3: Military and Financial Power - The U.S. maintains unparalleled military strength, with numerous military bases worldwide, which reinforces the use of the dollar in international transactions [7][10]. - The influence over the SWIFT financial system allows the U.S. to impose sanctions and restrict access to global trade for non-compliant countries, further solidifying the dollar's dominance [7][10]. Group 4: Path Dependency - The long-standing use of the dollar in international trade and finance has created a "path dependency," making it inconvenient for countries to switch to alternative currencies [7][10]. - Central banks and corporations hold significant dollar reserves, which perpetuates the dollar's status as the primary currency for global transactions [7][10]. Group 5: Economic Implications - The U.S. can print dollars to acquire goods and services globally, effectively using "paper" to obtain real wealth from other nations [10]. - However, the U.S. must balance the amount of money printed to avoid rapid devaluation and global inflation, maintaining its economic credibility [10].

Group 1 - Brazilian President Lula's strong response to the U.S. tariffs, particularly the 50% tariff on copper imports, highlights the escalating tensions between the U.S. and Brazil as part of a broader challenge to U.S. hegemony [1] - China's immediate reaction to the U.S. tariffs indicates a united front among BRICS nations, emphasizing the collective resistance against U.S. pressure [1][2] - The U.S. tariffs are seen as an attempt to reshape its domestic copper industry, but this strategy may face significant opposition from countries like China, Russia, and Brazil [1] Group 2 - China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated its stance against the broadening of national security concepts and emphasized that trade wars yield no winners, signaling a potential strong counteraction to U.S. tariff policies [2] - In the context of Southeast Asia, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi positioned China as a reliable partner for ASEAN countries, proposing cooperation and stability amidst U.S. actions [4] - Wang Yi's commitment to sign the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty underscores China's dedication to regional peace and serves as a challenge to U.S. nuclear policies [4] Group 3 - The collective response from countries like Brazil and China against U.S. tariffs reflects a growing sentiment among nations facing U.S. pressure, suggesting a potential shift in global alliances [5]