法院刚判定总统没有权力随意加关税，但白宫紧接着发布了新的命令，局势反而变得更加混乱。连自己 人都搞不清楚到底应该听谁的。与此同时，欧洲方面已经签署协议、投入资金，甚至在乌克兰谈判中也 有所退让，但这些努力还没等到落实，就变成了纸上谈兵。2026年2月21日，美国突然宣布将对欧洲的 关税从10%提高至15%，这与前一天还在表示临时优惠的态度截然不同。这显然不是一时的决定，而是 在法院20号裁定总统不能随便动用《国际紧急经济权力法》加税后，白宫连夜起草了新的行政命令，设 定了150天的期限，到期之后问题还得继续拖下去。 欧盟为什么不选择硬刚美国？并非不敢，而是真心困难重重。北约的七成军费依赖美国，美国提供了九 成的乌克兰军火。更何况，欧盟对美出口接近总出口的五分之一，而德国的汽车、法国的红酒等一旦涨 价，美国消费者可能就不再买账，根本无法施加足够的压力。而欧盟去年通过的《反胁迫条例》，到现 在为止，还连一个有效的反制清单都没能完全列出。耶鲁大学的研究表明，如果美国真对德国车加25% 的关税，欧盟每年将损失120亿欧元；而欧盟能够反击的手段，加起来甚至连美国GDP的一小部分都不 及。 然而，欧盟最近的动作越来越迅速 ...

目前，默茨的策略非常清晰：一方面，他对美国亮剑；另一方面，他也向中国伸出了橄榄枝。对美国，他明确划定了红线：如果美国认为他们可以通过关税 政策在全球施加影响，那是他们的事，但绝不是我们的政策。他警告道，如果美国继续过度施压，欧洲有足够的能力保护自身利益。而对中国，默茨将于2 月24日至27日首次以总理身份访问中国，并带领由大众、奔驰、宝马、空客等30名高管组成的庞大代表团——这是自默克尔时代以来，德国最大规模的访华 代表团。默茨不加掩饰地表示：关键字是战略伙伴关系。在特朗普关税政策的背景下，他希望能与中方探讨未来的合作方向，寻求能够在理念上契合、行动 上一致、共同塑造未来的伙伴。如今，外交政策与经济政策已经紧密相连，这是默茨反复强调的逻辑所在。 德国总理默茨，终于对美国不再继续忍让。近日，他已明确告知特朗普：如果美国继续一意孤行地对德国及欧盟强加不合理的关税，欧洲将毫不犹豫地发起 反击。你们可以这么做，但我们不会随便低头。如果局势恶化，我们欧洲完全有能力反制。这些话不仅说得坚定有力，还显示了德国新政府的决心。值得注 意的是，德国长期以来一直是美国在欧洲最为亲密的盟友，然而如今的态度变化，让人不禁好奇：为何默茨 ...

法国的算盘打得响亮，却忽略了一个基本事实：欧盟早已不是铁板一块。这一激进的提案刚一出台，便在欧洲内部引起了巨大的反响。德国的汽车产业深 度依赖中国市场，刚刚与中国达成了千亿级规模的合作订单，若对华加税，无异于自断其臂，必将严重损害本国企业利益。荷兰、匈牙利、西班牙等国与 中国有着紧密的经贸关系，从制造业供应链到投资、就业，都与中国市场紧密相连，根本不愿意跟随法国冒着贸易战的巨大风险。 即便是法国内部，也充满了模棱两可的态度。法国财长公开表示不支持那种一刀切的极端方案，而欧盟官方则始终保持沉默，既不表态支持，也不表态反 对，显然是希望法国先行试探国际舆论以及中国方面的反应，自己则躲在幕后避免承受直接压力。这种放风试探、幕后观望的操作方式，与此前在电动汽 车关税风波中的手段如出一辙。 自由贸易的口号听得再响亮，也抵挡不了某些西方国家在利益面前撕开伪装，露出真正的贸易保护主义面孔。继电动汽车关税风波之后，法国再次站在对 华挑衅的前沿，官方智库直接发布了一份激烈的报告，呼吁欧盟27个成员国联手，对中国商品加征最高30%的关税，甚至还公然建议照搬当年压制日本的 广场协议，强行让人民币对欧元大幅升值。法国试图通过贸易壁垒 ...

Core Viewpoint - The European Union (EU) is willing to temporarily implement a comprehensive free trade agreement with the South American Mercosur, despite the European Parliament's decision to submit the agreement for judicial review, which delays the approval process [1][5]. Group 1: Agreement Implementation - EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that the EU is ready to initiate the agreement as soon as at least one country in Mercosur completes its approval [1][4]. - The EU Commission has the legal authority to advance the temporary implementation of the agreement, as noted by the President of the EU Council, Antonio Costa [1][4]. Group 2: Trade Agreement Details - The agreement aims to gradually eliminate tariffs on over 90% of goods, including Argentine beef and German cars, creating one of the largest free trade zones globally, benefiting over 700 million consumers with lower shopping costs [2][5]. - The agreement has broad support from South American livestock countries and the European industrial sector [2][5]. Group 3: Political Context and Reactions - The approval process of the agreement is considered nearly certain in South America, with key members including Argentina and Brazil, while Bolivia may join in the future [3][6]. - France, as a major agricultural producer in the EU, seeks stronger protective measures for its farmers and has been pushing to delay the agreement's implementation [2][5]. - German Chancellor Friedrich Merz expressed regret over the European Parliament's decision to delay the vote and urged the EU to proceed with the temporary implementation of the agreement [2][5].

Core Viewpoint - The European Union (EU) is willing to implement a comprehensive free trade agreement with the South American Mercosur countries on a temporary basis, despite the European Parliament's decision to delay the approval process for legal review [1][5]. Group 1: EU's Position and Actions - EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that the EU is ready to take action as soon as at least one Mercosur member country completes the approval process [1][5]. - The EU Council President Costa mentioned that the EU Commission has the authority to advance the temporary implementation of the agreement [1][5]. - The decision to delay the approval process by the European Parliament was made by a narrow margin, which has temporarily halted the approval until a ruling from the European Court is received [1][6]. Group 2: Trade Agreement Details - The agreement aims to gradually eliminate tariffs on over 90% of goods, including Argentine beef and German cars, and is expected to create one of the largest free trade zones globally, benefiting over 700 million consumers [2][6]. - The agreement is part of Brussels' strategy to reduce historical trade dependence on the United States and expand external trade relations, especially in light of tensions during Trump's presidency [2][6]. - Support for the agreement is strong among South American agricultural countries and the European industrial sector [2][6]. Group 3: Opposition and Regional Support - France, as a major agricultural producer in Europe, seeks stronger protections for its farmers and has been advocating for a delay in the agreement's implementation [2][6]. - German Chancellor Merz expressed regret over the postponement of the vote and urged for the temporary implementation of the agreement [3][6]. - The Mercosur region broadly supports the agreement, with its final approval appearing to be a foregone conclusion [4][6].

Group 1 - The recent interactions between the US and Russia are not indicative of an alliance but rather a strategic exchange of interests, with the US seeking to refocus on competition with China while easing tensions with Russia [3] - The economic pressures on Russia due to Western sanctions have led to a desire for improved relations with the US, which could also benefit American businesses looking to re-enter the Russian market [3] - The turmoil within Europe, particularly with Germany and France struggling economically, has created a power vacuum that allows countries like Poland and Italy to emerge, complicating the EU's ability to maintain a unified stance [3] Group 2 - China's international standing is not threatened by US-Russia rapprochement, as it is built on solid economic and technological foundations, with a GDP of $17.8 trillion, accounting for 16.9% of the global total in 2023 [5] - China has been the world's leading engine of economic growth for several years, with significant contributions in manufacturing and R&D, including a research investment of nearly $470 billion in 2023 [5] - The current global power structure is characterized by a bipolar system with the US and China, alongside regional powers like India and Southeast Asia, indicating that China's position is stable and not easily undermined by US-Russia dynamics [7]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the significant shift in U.S. national strategy, moving from a leader in global order to a disruptor of existing systems, impacting economic policies, diplomatic strategies, and institutional changes [2][7][9] Economic Policy - The U.S. has adopted aggressive tariff policies under the Trump administration, affecting a wide range of products from various countries, including German cars and Korean chips, which has raised concerns globally [2][4] - The U.S. is perceived as a "giant money-sucking machine," transferring inflationary pressures to trade partners while enjoying short-term benefits [4] - The federal debt has surged to 145% of GDP, with the new "America First" legislation prioritizing military spending and symbolic projects, raising questions about who will ultimately bear this debt burden [4] Data Integrity and Governance - There are growing concerns about the credibility of U.S. economic data, especially after the dismissal of key personnel from the Labor Statistics Bureau, leading to reliance on subjective judgments rather than objective statistics [5] - The efficiency reforms led by Elon Musk have devolved into a system of favoritism, undermining the initial goals of innovation and efficiency [5] Foreign Policy - U.S. military actions, such as airstrikes in Yemen, have not achieved intended outcomes and have instead fueled anti-American sentiment, indicating a focus on domestic political gains over regional stability [6] - The U.S. has shown erratic behavior towards allies, creating uncertainty in international relations, as seen in its inconsistent support for Ukraine [6] Global Trade and Cooperation - The U.S. is seen as undermining international trade rules, with its actions leading to a restructuring of global supply chains and increased costs for consumers worldwide [7][8] - The World Trade Organization is struggling due to U.S. obstruction, pushing countries towards bilateral agreements and eroding the foundation of global cooperation [8] International Order - The article warns of a shift from a unipolar to a multipolar world, as countries begin to implement risk-reduction strategies, such as Europe pursuing strategic autonomy and Japan diversifying supply chains [8] - The decline of U.S. leadership and the rise of self-interested policies signal a need for countries to seek new stable frameworks for international order [9]

Group 1 - The U.S. government is pressuring allies to impose high tariffs of 50-100% on Chinese goods, but both the EU and G7 have largely ignored these calls due to their deep economic ties with China [1] - The U.S. is attempting to shift focus to China amid difficulties in mediating the Russia-Ukraine conflict, claiming that China should be held responsible for the war [3] - Trump's call for NATO members to collectively impose tariffs on China is seen as an inappropriate extension of a military alliance into economic disputes, with no NATO country responding to this request [5] Group 2 - The U.S. strategy to extend NATO's influence into economic matters contradicts its founding principles and undermines international rules, as it seeks to contain China's rise through trade barriers [7] - Major NATO members, such as Germany and France, have significant economic dependencies on China, and following the U.S. in imposing tariffs could lead to increased costs and loss of market share for European companies [9] - Some NATO countries, like Hungary, are resistant to U.S. demands, indicating a divide within the alliance regarding the approach to China [9]

Group 1 - The EU is preparing a countermeasure plan against the US, indicating a shift in trade dynamics and a response to the US's unilateral tariff increases [1][9][14] - The EU's countermeasure includes a list targeting €100 billion worth of US goods, significantly higher than previous plans, signaling a stronger stance against US trade policies [9][14] - Germany's exports to the US are substantial, with €157.9 billion in 2024, making the country particularly vulnerable to US tariffs, which has prompted a more aggressive response from German officials [5][9] Group 2 - The EU's core demands from China include lifting rare earth export controls, halting energy trade with Russia, and addressing overcapacity issues, which clash with China's red lines [3][7] - Despite political tensions, practical cooperation between the EU and China is ongoing, with negotiations on electric vehicle subsidies and rare earth trade [3][7] - The EU's dependency on China for rare earths is significant, with 78% of its supply coming from China, highlighting the complexity of the EU's position in the trade landscape [7][9] Group 3 - The EU is increasingly viewing China as an independent partner rather than a subordinate in the context of US-China relations, reflecting a strategic shift in its foreign policy [3][14] - A survey indicates that 67% of German companies plan to increase investments in China, showcasing a growing interest in the Chinese market as a counterbalance to US pressures [9][14] - The trade relationship between the EU and China is projected to reach a record high of $847 billion in 2024, demonstrating the importance of this partnership for both sides [9][14]

Group 1 - Trump's proposed 30% tariffs on European goods are seen as a negotiation tactic to gain leverage in trade discussions, particularly aimed at garnering support from American blue-collar workers ahead of elections [3][6][10] - The European Union, particularly under Ursula von der Leyen's leadership, is caught between a desire to retaliate and the fear of significant economic repercussions, as many European industries rely heavily on the U.S. market [5][8][10] - The potential impact of these tariffs could lead to increased prices for consumers on both sides of the Atlantic, affecting everyday goods and services, and ultimately harming the working class [9][11] Group 2 - The U.S. economy is currently fragile, and a trade war could exacerbate existing issues, making both sides hesitant to escalate tensions further [10][11] - The situation reflects a broader concern about the reliability of the U.S. as an ally, as European nations may need to reconsider their trade strategies and relationships moving forward [10] - The outcome of this trade dispute is likely to result in minimal actual changes, with both sides using aggressive rhetoric to negotiate better terms rather than engaging in a full-blown trade war [10][11]