前阵子特朗普在自己开的社交平台Truth Social上发了个消息，说美国的大豆种植户现在很艰难，因为中国 出于"谈判"的目的，不买美国大豆了，他还透露四周后要和中方见面，大豆问题会是重点。 中国是世界上最大的大豆买家，买的大豆量占全球进口的三分之二，以前美国是中国买大豆的主要对象， 现在巴西和阿根廷成了新宠。 眼看着中国不买，美国大豆协会着急了，赶紧给特朗普写信，希望政府能帮忙解决出口问题。 美国大豆卖不出去，除了政治因素，还有关税问题，特朗普其实很清楚问题有多棘手，一边是农民不停抱 怨，一边是党内强硬派不肯让步。 如果降低对中国的大豆关税，别人会说他"对中国妥协"；可要是不降，农民又越来越不满，左右为难，搞 得他在竞选活动上谈农业都没底气。 这场大豆风波，其实就是中美在"供应链安全"上较劲，美国一直觉得，大豆是自己的"王牌"，因为中国需 求大、离不开美国，所以每次谈判都想用大豆要挟中国。 但现在中国用实际行动证明，美国这招不管用了，中国不仅从南美买大豆，还和加拿大、澳大利亚等国谈 合作，国内大豆自给率也在提高，2024年中国国产大豆比前年多了11%。现在中国已经没有"非买美国大豆 不可"的压力了。 反过来 ...

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 discusses the implications of the Trump administration's "security for economy" strategy, using South Korea as a case study, highlighting how economic concessions were made under the pressure of security threats from the U.S. [1][18] Economic Concessions - South Korea agreed to a 15% tariff on exports to the U.S., which, although lower than the initially threatened 25%, still undermines the competitiveness of South Korean companies in the U.S. market [3] - South Korea was compelled to invest $350 billion in the U.S., with $150 billion specifically allocated for the U.S. shipbuilding industry, adversely affecting South Korea's own leading shipbuilding sector [3] - An additional $100 billion in U.S. liquefied natural gas purchases was mandated, leading to significant capital outflow and compromising South Korea's energy security strategy [3] Security Pressure - The U.S. military's potential withdrawal of 4,500 troops from South Korea created significant political turmoil, leading to heightened fears beyond mere economic threats [5] - The U.S. justified the troop withdrawal as a strategic adjustment to reduce vulnerability in front-line deployments, which was perceived as a form of extreme pressure on South Korea [8] Global Trade Dynamics - South Korea's concessions are part of a broader trend where allies have succumbed to U.S. pressure under the "America First" policy, with other countries like the UK, Japan, and the EU also making significant economic sacrifices [10][12] - Countries like Canada, India, and China have adopted different strategies in response to U.S. pressure, with Canada taking a hard stance, India employing delay tactics, and China successfully forcing concessions from the U.S. [14] Long-term Implications - The compromises made by South Korea reflect a successful implementation of the Trump administration's strategy, which, while yielding short-term economic benefits for the U.S., risks eroding long-standing alliances and trust among allies [18]