The writer is an economist, anchor, geopolitical analyst
and the President of All Pakistan Private Schools’ Federation
president@Pakistanprivateschools.com
In a provocative move that has sent shockwaves through global markets, U.S. President Donald Trump announced on July 7, 2025, via his Truth Social platform, that any country aligning with what he terms the “Anti-American policies of BRICS” will face an additional 10% tariff on their exports to the United States, with “no exceptions.” The statement, made on the heels of the 17th BRICS Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, escalates an already fraught relationship between the U.S. and the bloc of emerging economies—Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and newer members Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Donald Trump’s tariff threats against BRICS nations have sparked intense debate about the potential consequences for the global economy. As the U.S. grapples with unprecedented debt and global trade becomes increasingly multipolar, the question remains: Can America afford to antagonise a bloc representing half the world’s population and 40% of its economy? The announcement raises critical questions about the sustainability of America’s trade strategy, given its staggering $34 trillion national debt, and whether Trump’s aggressive stance risks alienating key global partners, potentially turning the world against U.S. economic interests. The BRICS Summit, held on July 6-7, 2025, saw leaders from the 11-member bloc issue a 31-page joint declaration that, while avoiding direct mention of the U.S., sharply criticised “unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures” that “distort trade” and violate World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. The statement also condemned military strikes on Iran, a BRICS member, without naming the U.S. or Israel, which conducted the operations. These veiled critiques appeared to provoke Trump, who interpreted the bloc’s positions as “anti-American,” particularly their discussions on reducing reliance on the U.S. dollar in global trade—a long-standing BRICS objective known as “de-dollarisation.” Trump’s response was swift and uncompromising: “Any Country aligning itself with the anti-American policies of BRICS will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10% Tariff. There will be no exceptions to this policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” He further announced that tariff letters detailing country-specific rates and trade agreements would be delivered starting July 7, signalling the end of a 90-day pause on his “reciprocal” tariff policies. This follows earlier threats in 2024 and early 2025, where Trump warned of 100% tariffs on BRICS nations if they pursued a common currency or backed alternatives to the U.S. dollar. The BRICS bloc, originally formed in 2009 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China (with South Africa joining in 2010), has grown into a formidable economic coalition. The addition of Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE in 2023-2024, along with partner countries like Vietnam, Thailand, and Nigeria, has expanded its global reach. Representing over half the world’s population and 40% of global economic output, BRICS is positioning itself as a counterweight to Western-dominated institutions like the G7 and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The bloc’s initiatives, such as the New Development Bank and discussions on a cross-border payment system to bypass the dollar-based SWIFT network, underscore its ambition to reshape global economic governance. Trump’s accusation of “anti-American policies” seems to hinge on BRICS’ push for de-dollarisation and their criticism of U.S. tariffs, which they argue disrupt global supply chains and exacerbate economic disparities. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, hosting the summit, emphasised the need for a “multipolar” world order, stating, “If international governance does not reflect the new multipolar reality of the 21st century, it is up to BRICS to help bring it up to date.” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning echoed this, calling BRICS an “important platform for cooperation” that “advocates openness” and “does not target any country.” South African President Cyril Ramaphosa also pushed back, insisting the bloc is not “anti-American” and expressing confidence in ongoing trade talks with the U.S. The U.S., with a national debt exceeding $34 trillion—the highest in the world—relies heavily on global trade to sustain its economy. In 2022, U.S. goods-and-services trade with China alone totaled $758.4 billion, while trade with India reached $191.8 billion. Other BRICS nations, such as Brazil (coffee and agricultural products), South Africa (minerals), and Saudi Arabia (oil), are critical suppliers to the U.S. market. Trump’s tariff threats risk disrupting these trade flows, potentially driving up costs for American consumers and businesses. Economists, including those at the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), warn that a 100% tariff on BRICS nations, as previously threatened, could shave $432 billion off U.S. GDP by the end of a second Trump term and increase inflation by 1.6%. Even the proposed 10% tariff could exacerbate price pressures, as domestic firms, not foreign exporters, typically bear the cost of tariffs. Moreover, alienating BRICS nations could accelerate their efforts to reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar, a move that, while unlikely to dethrone the dollar in the near term (it accounts for 58% of global foreign exchange reserves), could erode U.S. financial influence over time. China, the dominant BRICS member, is already promoting the renminbi (RMB) and developing alternatives like the e-CNY digital currency. Western sanctions on Russia have further fueled BRICS’ interest in non-dollar payment systems, a trend that Trump’s coercive tariffs might inadvertently hasten. As Brad Setser, a former Treasury Department economist, noted, such threats “make the use of the dollar appear to be a favour to the U.S.,” potentially encouraging other nations to seek alternatives. Trump’s aggressive rhetoric appears driven by a mix of economic nationalism and geopolitical strategy. His “America First” doctrine views tariffs as a tool to boost domestic manufacturing, protect jobs, and pressure trading partners into concessions. By targeting BRICS, Trump aims to deter the bloc’s de-dollarization efforts, which he perceives as a direct challenge to U.S. economic dominance. His administration has already secured framework trade deals with the UK, Vietnam, and a partial deal with China, reducing tariffs on some Chinese imports from 145% to 30%. These agreements suggest Trump is using tariffs as leverage in negotiations, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent noting a “full mailbox” of new trade proposals following the latest threats.
As the world watches Trump’s high-stakes gamble unfold, one thing is clear, the fate of global trade hangs precariously in the balance. With the US imposing tariffs on BRICS nations to preserve dollar dominance, the bloc’s future and the global economy’s stability are uncertain. Will Trump’s gamble pay off, or will it lead to a multipolar world where the dollar’s reign is challenged?
Trump’s tariff threats against BRICS nations reflect a high-stakes gamble to preserve U.S. economic dominance in a rapidly changing global landscape. While the strategy may yield short-term concessions, it risks long-term damage to America’s trade relationships and financial influence, particularly with economically vital BRICS members like China and India. With the U.S. grappling with unprecedented debt and global trade increasingly multipolar, the question remains: Can America afford to antagonise a bloc representing half the world’s population and 40% of its economy? Trump’s actions may bolster his domestic image as a tough negotiator, but they could also accelerate the very de-dollarisation he seeks to prevent, turning key partners into adversaries in a world that, as Lula noted, “does not need an emperor.” However, Trump’s approach is shortsighted and risks isolating the U.S. at a time when global cooperation is vital. Can America, which has the highest debt burden, survive with such I’ll-trade steps, indeed a strategy “reckless,” disregards the interconnected nature of global trade. BRICS leaders have responded with defiance tempered by caution. Brazil’s Lula, undeterred, reiterated the need for alternatives to the dollar, stating, “The world needs to find a way that our trade relations don’t have to pass through the dollar.” China’s Mao Ning condemned tariffs as “coercive diplomacy,” while South Africa and Indonesia emphasized constructive dialogue with the U.S. India, in particular, is navigating a delicate balance, pursuing a bilateral trade agreement with the U.S. while maintaining its BRICS commitments. Indonesia’s economic minister, Airlangga Hartarto, is set to visit the U.S. to negotiate a $34 billion trade pact, including concessions on wheat imports and reduced duties. The broader implications of Trump’s policy are uncertain. The U.S. has until August 1, 2025, to implement the new tariffs, giving BRICS nations a window to negotiate. However, the threat alone has heightened tensions, with economists warning of retaliatory measures that could further disrupt global trade. For instance, China could restrict exports of critical minerals, as it did briefly before the recent trade deal, while other BRICS nations might align more closely with non-Western financial A High-Stakes Gamble: Trump’s Tariff Threats Against BRICS. Trump’s strategy is driven by a desire to preserve U.S. economic dominance in a rapidly changing global landscape. By imposing tariffs on BRICS nations, Trump aims to: Trump believes that tariffs will protect American industries from a fair trade practices and promote domestic economic growth. Trump hopes to extract undue concessions from BRICS nations, particularly China and India, on trade and economic issues. However, Trump’s strategy risks long-term damage to America’s trade relationships and financial influence. BRICS nations may retaliate against U.S. tariffs, leading to a trade war that could harm American businesses and consumers. Trump’s actions may accelerate the de-dollarisation of the global economy, as countries seek to reduce their dependence on the U.S. dollar. By antagonising key partners like China and India, the U.S. may lose influence in global economic decision-making and cede ground to other nations. Can the U.S. Afford to Alienate BRICS?
The answer is likely no. The BRICS bloc represents a significant portion of the world’s population and economy, and alienating them could have severe consequences for the U.S. Some potential consequences include: A trade war with BRICS nations could reduce economic growth in the U.S. and lead to higher prices for consumers; By antagonizing key partners, the U.S. may lose its position as a global leader in trade and economics; Trump’s actions may accelerate the trend towards a multipolar world, where the U.S. is no longer the dominant economic power. Trump’s tariff threats against BRICS nations reflect a high-stakes gamble to preserve U.S. economic dominance. While the strategy may yield short-term concessions, it risks long-term damage to America’s trade relationships and financial influence. As the world becomes increasingly multipolar, the U.S. must carefully consider the potential consequences of its actions and seek to build strong relationships with key partners like China and India. By doing so, with careful consideration and strategic planning, the U.S. can navigate the complexities of the global economy and maintain its position as a leader in international trade. As the world watches Trump’s high-stakes gamble unfold, one thing is clear: the fate of global trade hangs precariously in the balance. With the US imposing tariffs on BRICS nations to preserve dollar dominance, the bloc’s future and the global economy’s stability are uncertain. Trump’s strategy may yield short-term gains, but it risks alienating key partners, accelerating de-dollarisation, and sparking trade wars. As India navigates this complex landscape, its response will be crucial in shaping the future of US-India trade relations. Will Trump’s gamble pay off, or will it lead to a multipolar world where the dollar’s reign is challenged?
