Bremmer: U.S. Now Dysfunctional, Ushering in ‘G Zero' Era; Warns China Will Benefit From Lack of U.S. Leadership

Yomiuri Shimbun

29-04-2025

Courtesy of the Eurasia Group
Ian Bremmer
WASHINGTON — International political scientist Ian Bremmer has warned in an interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun that the United States has become 'dysfunctional' under President Donald Trump, and that the world has entered a 'G-Zero' era in which no country is willing to lead the international order.
Bremmer, 55, made the remarks before Trump, who has touted his policy of 'America first,' marked his 100th day in office on Tuesday.
Bremmer brought up the idea of 'G-Zero' for the first time in 2012. 'No other country or group of countries is capable of replacing the U.S.,' he said, analyzing the situation in the wake of the Trump administration's announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, an international framework to combat global warming, and the World Health Organization. 'The Chinese are the principal long-term beneficiary,' Bremmer added.
The United States' power in the international community comes from its 'reputational strength,' not just its economic and military strength, Bremmer said, and other countries could count on such 'reputational capital' no matter who was president. He expressed concerns over Trump's political tactics, saying that the U.S. president has 'done his best to destroy' that reputational capital.
Trump's stance that 'if I have the power, I will get the outcome I want' pushes around weaker countries, Bremmer said. He described this approach as the United States inflicting 'self-harm' geopolitically.
Noting that the 'reciprocal tariffs' imposed by the Trump administration have heightened uncertainty and will further worsen global economic growth, Bremmer stressed that 'no one is a winner' in a trade war.
He predicted that many countries, including Japan, South Korea and Vietnam, would work on 'de-risking' in their relations with the United States. Even if these countries are asked by the Trump administration to sever ties with China, they will 'continue to hedge and work with both the Americans and the Chinese simultaneously,' Bremmer said.
The following is excerpted from the interview, which was conducted online on April 23.
Q: Regarding Trump's first 100 days, what has surprised you so far compared to the first time he was elected?
A: The broad thing is how much more confident Trump is this time around. I think especially after he was almost assassinated and he was shot in the head [in July last year]. I think that that really did affect his personality. It made him believe that he was saved by God to accomplish something important, and that he could have a very short time to accomplish it. He could be gone at any moment. So, with Trump this time there's also a level of urgency; so, it is both confidence and urgency. That has led to a much more disruptive and much more revolutionary behavior on the part of the president.
Q: I see that geopolitically the impact of President Trump is huge. You have also often mentioned about how it is self-harming. Would you elaborate some more on that?
A: It is self-harm because the United States' power on the global stage does not just come from its economic strength. It does not just come from its military strength. It also comes from its reputational strength. That reputational capital that the United States stands for things like collective security and free trade and rule of law and democracy, and that other countries can count on that no matter who is the president, and Trump has really done his best to destroy a lot of that reputational capital.
Now it is 'if I have the power, I will get the outcome I want,' which is also actually a very Chinese perspective.
We know that Trump is much more effective pushing around weaker countries. The Ukrainians are much weaker, and so Trump was much more effective in saying, I'm going to cut off your intelligence. I'm going to cut off your defense support. And the Ukrainians took that seriously. They realized that they need the Americans, and so that's why Ukraine suddenly accepted a 30-day ceasefire with no preconditions.
China's influence
Now we are in a G-Zero world. The United States does not want to lead globally, but no other country or group of countries is capable of replacing the U.S. So, the Chinese are the principal long-term beneficiary.
This is good for China long term, because if the U.S. is ending USAID and pulling out of the Global South, who's going to benefit the most? China.
Who will benefit, if the U.S. is pulling out of the World Health Organization and is less interested in the U.N., who will then be the most powerful country in influencing those organizations? It will be China.
Negotiations with U.S.
Trump doesn't really see the world through the frame of allies, so if you're Japan, you need to get through that.
You know where you just sent a delegation over and they're wearing Make America Great Again [Trump's campaign slogan] hats in the White House, which makes them look stupid, frankly, and they shouldn't do that, and it undermines Japan.
But the reality is that with the U.S., as powerful as it is today, most countries are going to do what Japan is doing.
Publicly maybe they sometimes say different things because they don't want to fight and what they want is to announce a deal with the Americans as soon as possible, because the Americans have a more powerful economy, and because the Japanese need the American defense umbrella over Japan, and the South Koreans feel the same way, and the Vietnamese feel the same way, and the Mexicans feel the same way.
They will work to de-risk themselves from the United States, which is kind of a staggering thing to say, given that we've been talking about de-risking from China for the last decade or more.
Trade war
No one is a winner. The ability of goods and services and capital and people to move faster and faster across borders is economically good for everyone. Now, some people are displaced and they get angry, and they need to … see redistribution which comes from the wealth that the companies, the shareholders, the governments, have managed to make through all this growth.
The U.S. has failed in that policy to help those who were displaced. But undoing that and bringing tariffs to 1930s levels or higher is an environment where no one will win. Global growth is going down, and that is compounded by greater uncertainty.
It is targeting absolutely everybody at the same time. It's a mistake in my view.
In some cases, there's permanent damage. Some things cannot be unseen and can't be fixed.
Ian Bremmer
After serving as a research fellow at Stanford University and in other positions, Bremmer in 1998 founded the Eurasia Group, which conducts risk analysis of international affairs and other research. He is known for his concept of 'G-Zero,' and his list of the top 10 risks for the year, which is released at the beginning of each year, attracts significant attention.