这场看似不对等的较量背后，是印度掐准了三大底牌：俄油每吨省89美元的年均节省额、对美国市场仅占GDP4.2%的低依赖度，以及全球南 方国家反双重标准的集体情绪。 "我们每进口三桶油，就有一桶来自俄罗斯。 这不是选择题，而是生存题。 一个月内，美国对印度连砍两刀关税，先因贸易协议谈不拢加征25%，再以"购买俄油加剧乌克兰冲突"为由追加25%，部分印度输美商品税率 飙至50%。 但印度不仅拒绝削减34%的俄油进口份额，反而加速与俄罗斯签署军购协议、推动金砖国家扩容，甚至让莫迪四次拒接特朗普电话。 当特朗普的关税大棒撞上莫迪的"战略自主"，一场重新定义新兴经济体与西方关系的博弈正在上演。 2025年7月31日，特朗普以"印度设置贸易壁垒"为由，对印度输美商品征收25%基础关税。 不到一周后的8月6日，美国再以"印度购买俄罗斯 石油"为名追加25%惩罚性关税，使印度成为美国税率最高的贸易伙伴之一。 两项关税精准打击印度对美出口的"命脉品类"，服装、宝石和汽车零部件，这些领域占印度对美出口总额的50%以上，涉及数百万就业岗 位。 印度外长苏杰生直接在公开场合点破美国的双重标准："欧盟的匈牙利长期进口俄油，德国2024年 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles indicates that the U.S. is expected to demand more concessions from the EU in upcoming trade negotiations, including a baseline tariff of at least 15% on most European goods [1][3] - The EU's response to the U.S. demands has been notably strong, with Germany calling for the EU to prepare countermeasures, indicating a shift from previous tendencies to concede under U.S. pressure [3][5] - Germany, as the economic leader of the EU, is particularly concerned about the potential fragmentation of the EU and is advocating for a firm stance against the U.S. to protect the integrity of the union [5][7] Group 2 - The articles highlight that the EU's current hardline approach is a response to the realization of the severe economic impacts that high U.S. tariffs could have, which could threaten the EU's cohesion and loyalty among member states [3][5] - Germany's push for countermeasures against the U.S. marks a significant departure from past practices, suggesting a readiness to confront the U.S. directly over tariff issues [5][7] - The potential alliance between the EU and China is seen as a strategic move to strengthen the EU's negotiating position against U.S. economic pressure, with upcoming visits by EU leaders to China being a key development [7]

Core Viewpoint - The EU has canceled the high-level economic dialogue with China due to perceived lack of progress on trade issues, which raises concerns about the future of China-EU relations [1] Group 1: China-EU Relations - This year marks the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between China and the EU, highlighting the historical significance of their partnership [1] - The current international situation is characterized by increased instability, unilateralism, and economic bullying, which underscores the need for strengthened strategic communication and cooperation between China and the EU [1] - China expresses willingness to work with the EU to implement important consensus reached by both leaders and to enhance high-level exchanges and dialogue cooperation, aiming for stable and long-term relations [1]

Core Viewpoint - The recent joint statement by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and representatives from 53 African countries criticizes the United States for its unilateralism and economic bullying, calling for fair and reciprocal solutions to trade disputes [1][3]. Group 1: Context and Background - The joint statement follows the U.S. imposing high tariffs on several African countries, with some reaching as high as 47% [3]. - The timing of the statement is significant, occurring immediately after the conclusion of U.S.-China negotiations in London, indicating China's firm stance on trade issues [3][7]. Group 2: China's Position and Strategy - The statement serves as a counter to U.S. claims of aiding Africa, highlighting that while the U.S. imposes high tariffs, China is genuinely assisting African nations through infrastructure and agricultural projects [5][9]. - The declaration aims to strengthen China's influence in the Global South, expanding its diplomatic relationships and positioning itself as a more reliable partner compared to the U.S. [7][9]. Group 3: Implications for International Relations - The joint statement is seen as a strategic move in the ongoing U.S.-China rivalry, with China leveraging this opportunity to assert its moral high ground and agenda-setting power in future negotiations [7]. - The document reflects a broader effort by China to reshape the current international order, moving beyond traditional platforms like G7 and WTO to engage with developing nations [7][9].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the escalation of U.S. protectionism through the increase of tariffs on imported steel and aluminum products from 25% to 50%, which poses significant risks to global trade stability [1] Impact on Bosnia and Herzegovina - The U.S. tariffs have a direct and severe impact on Bosnia and Herzegovina's defense industry, which constitutes over 60% of its exports to the U.S. The tariffs on this sector have risen from 12% to 35% [1] - Other sectors, including metals, are also affected by the increased tariffs, indicating a broader economic impact beyond just defense [1] Regional Trade Dynamics - Bosnia and Herzegovina, while not an EU member, has strong economic ties with the EU, particularly in the automotive manufacturing sector. The long-term effects of U.S. tariffs on Bosnian enterprises are significant and cannot be overlooked [1] Response to Tariff Challenges - The economist suggests that Western Balkan countries should collaborate and enhance communication to effectively respond to external shocks caused by U.S. tariffs [1] - The EU's response to U.S. tariffs is viewed as insufficient, lacking internal consensus, which hampers its ability to counteract U.S. economic pressure effectively [1] Long-term Economic Consequences - The article argues that unless the U.S. halts its aggressive tariff policies, true trade fairness will remain elusive. The U.S. approach is seen as treating trade partners as subordinates rather than equal collaborators, undermining international trust and cooperation [1] - The long-term outlook suggests that the U.S. economy may bear the greatest losses from its own protectionist measures [1] Call for a Fair Trade System - There is a call for major economies to work towards establishing a fairer and clearer global trade system, which would allow smaller economies like Bosnia and Herzegovina to thrive in a more balanced international trade environment [1]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights a significant shift in India's trade strategy towards the U.S. following the recent U.S.-China trade agreement, indicating a more confrontational stance from India [1][7]. - The U.S. and China reached a consensus to mutually reduce tariffs, with both parties agreeing to eliminate 91% of tariffs and suspend the implementation of 24% tariffs [1][5]. - India's previous approach was characterized by a willingness to negotiate with the U.S. to alleviate economic pressures, as evidenced by the reduction of import tariffs on approximately 8,500 industrial products [3][5]. Group 2 - Following the U.S.-China negotiations, India proposed retaliatory tariffs on certain U.S. goods in response to the U.S. imposing a 25% tariff on Indian steel and aluminum products, marking India's first counteraction since the trade conflict began [7][10]. - Analysts suggest that India's shift in strategy is influenced by two main factors: the progress made in the U.S.-China talks, which provided India with a perceived opportunity, and dissatisfaction with the U.S. stance during the recent India-Pakistan conflict [7][8]. - The potential for escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and India could hinder ongoing economic negotiations and impact key industries in both countries [10].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint emphasizes that countries with a spirit of cooperation and strategic foresight will be key players in shaping the future economic landscape [1][3] - China's strong capabilities in manufacturing, infrastructure, and long-term financing, along with its commitment to free trade, position it as a stabilizing force in the global economy [1] - The Belt and Road Initiative proposed by China fosters cooperation through infrastructure projects, capacity collaboration, and sustainable funding, connecting production centers with export routes [1] Group 2 - The trade tensions initiated by the United States are expected to severely impact vulnerable economies, including many African nations, by increasing costs and disrupting infrastructure projects [2] - The integration of African economies into global value chains heightens their vulnerability to external shocks, necessitating a coordinated risk management framework to mitigate the effects of trade wars [2] - The World Trade Organization has historically served as an arbitrator for trade disputes, but its effectiveness is currently hindered by U.S. obstruction, which undermines trust and long-term investment [2] Group 3 - Economic resilience is derived from cooperation and structural reforms rather than protectionism, with the African Continental Free Trade Area being a step in the right direction [3] - African nations are deepening cooperation with countries like China, Brazil, India, and Russia in areas such as technology, education, and infrastructure, which provides greater policy space to counter economic threats from the U.S. [3] - Future economic recovery in Africa is anticipated to be achieved through enhanced collective resilience, shared innovation, and sustainable growth rather than economic fragmentation [3]

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs criticizes the United States for using tariffs as a tool for unilateralism and economic bullying, which undermines the legitimate interests of other countries while serving U.S. hegemonic interests [1] Group 1: U.S. Tariff Policy - The U.S. is accused of employing tariffs as a means of extreme pressure and self-interest, reflecting typical unilateralism and protectionism [1] - China firmly opposes the U.S. practice of imposing so-called "reciprocal tariffs" and has taken strong legal measures to counteract this [1] Group 2: China's Response - China is committed to safeguarding its development interests and defending international fairness and justice [1] - The country aims to maintain the international economic and trade order while expressing a willingness to enhance communication and coordination with Latin American countries to uphold multilateralism and the multilateral trading system [1]

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese ambassador to Guinea-Bissau, Yang Renhuo, expressed a strong stance against the U.S. imposition of tariffs, labeling it as unilateralism, protectionism, and economic bullying, which severely impacts international trade and violates World Trade Organization rules [3][4]. Group 1: U.S. Tariff Impact - The U.S. has announced tariffs on all trade partners, affecting over 180 countries, which has drawn significant domestic and international criticism [3]. - The tariffs are expected to shrink global merchandise trade volume by approximately 1% this year, according to the World Trade Organization [4]. - The tariffs disproportionately affect developing countries, exacerbating wealth disparities and causing economic instability, particularly in Africa [4]. Group 2: China's Economic Resilience - China’s economy continues to grow, achieving a 5.4% growth rate in the first quarter, despite U.S. trade pressures [5]. - The Chinese economy is characterized as a vast market with a complete industrial chain, relying on self-reliance and hard work rather than external favors [5]. - The U.S. trade bullying has not only failed to achieve its goals but has also resulted in losses for American businesses and consumers, increasing the risk of domestic economic recession [5]. Group 3: China-Guinea-Bissau Relations - The relationship between China and Guinea-Bissau is strong, with recent high-level visits and discussions aimed at enhancing mutual cooperation [7]. - China has committed to providing zero-tariff treatment for 100% of products from 33 African countries, including Guinea-Bissau, contrasting with U.S. tariff measures [7]. - There are significant opportunities for cooperation in sectors such as cashew exports and bauxite exploration between China and Guinea-Bissau [7].

Group 1 - Thailand is a manufacturing hub in the region, with exports accounting for over 60% of its GDP [1] - The impact of Trump's tariff policy could result in economic losses of up to 800 billion THB (approximately 24 billion USD), which is about 4% of Thailand's GDP [1] - The US is Thailand's largest export market for 2024, with exports to the US reaching 55 billion USD last year [1] Group 2 - Thailand faces a 36% tariff under the US's comprehensive tariff measures, making it one of the most affected Southeast Asian countries [1] - If a tax reduction agreement is not reached within the "90-day grace period" provided by the US, Thailand's economic outlook will be negatively impacted [1] - Thailand's GDP growth was 2.5% last year, but failure to negotiate lower tariffs could reduce this year's growth rate by at least 1 percentage point [1] Group 3 - The Federation of Thai Industries (FTI) estimates that the "reciprocal" tariff rate could range from 10% to 15%, potentially causing losses of 200 to 300 billion THB [1] - The actual tariff framework announced by the US exceeds simple reciprocal calculations, with potential economic losses estimated at 700 to 800 billion THB [2] - The automotive industry is the first to be impacted, as the US is the largest export destination for Thai automotive parts [2] Group 4 - The automotive sector experienced a significant decline last year, with annual sales dropping by 26% to 573,000 units and exports decreasing by 8.8% to 1.01 million units [2] - High tariffs may force local companies to consider mergers, layoffs, or even closures [2] - The processed food and seafood industries, which previously enjoyed zero tariffs, are also likely to be severely affected [3] Group 5 - Thailand has chosen to indefinitely postpone negotiations rather than confront the issue directly, allowing more preparation time and expressing dissatisfaction with US economic dominance [3]