Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the fragility of trade agreements made by the Trump administration, highlighting the potential for these agreements to be more about political posturing than actual economic benefits. It emphasizes that the agreements may not lead to the expected outcomes and could result in a shift in global trade dynamics away from U.S. dominance [5][7][27]. Group 1: Trade Agreements and Their Viability - The U.S. and China have agreed to pause the implementation of 24% tariffs for 90 days, indicating a potential thaw in trade tensions, but the effectiveness of these agreements remains questionable [5]. - Many of the trade agreements, such as those with the EU and Japan, lack concrete details and written records, leading to skepticism about their enforceability and actual economic impact [11][19]. - The commitments made by countries to purchase U.S. goods, such as the EU's promise to buy $750 billion in energy products, are viewed as unrealistic given the current export levels from the U.S. [13][14]. Group 2: Economic Impact and Criticism - The Trump administration's trade policies have resulted in the highest tariffs in nearly a century, costing American households an average of $2,400 annually [8]. - Job losses in the manufacturing sector have continued, with 11,000 jobs lost in July alone, contradicting the administration's claims of job creation through these policies [8]. - The article argues that the focus on tariffs has led to increased costs for consumers and has not effectively brought manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. [25]. Group 3: Global Trade Dynamics - The article suggests that the aggressive trade policies have led to a shift in alliances, with traditional U.S. allies like the EU and Japan seeking closer ties with China and reducing their dependence on the U.S. [25][27]. - The potential for a "anti-U.S. alliance" is highlighted, as countries look to diversify their trade relationships in response to U.S. policies [25]. - The article concludes that the Trump administration's approach may lead to the decline of the existing international trade system, with new rules potentially being established without U.S. leadership [27].