Bremmer: U.S. Now Dysfunctional, Ushering in ‘G Zero' Era; Warns China Will Benefit From Lack of U.S. Leadership
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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tokyo Weekender
5 hours ago
- Tokyo Weekender
Two-Tier Pricing in Japan: Why Tourists Are Paying More
In Okinawa's new Junglia theme park, there are two ways to buy a one-day pass. If you land on the park's English-language site, the ticket price is ¥8,000 yen before tax — ¥8,800 after. That's about $59 at today's exchange rate. Switch to the Japanese-language portal, though, and the same ticket costs ¥6,930, tax included — around $47. But you can't just click and buy it. You'll need to enter a Japanese address and phone number. According to Honichi , the policy comes from Katana Marketing, headed by Morioka Tsuyoshi, the man credited with pulling Universal Studios Japan out of a tailspin two decades ago. Katana's reasoning is simple: Inbound tourists spend three times as much as domestic visitors. If they have the means — and the willingness — to pay more, why not let them? This is what's known as two-tier pricing — charging one price to locals and another, usually higher, price to visitors. And in Japan right now, it's showing up in places you might not expect. List of Contents: A Growing Trend The Global Norm Why People Are Talking About Two-Tier Pricing in Japan When It Works — and When It Doesn't The Real Fix Related Posts A Growing Trend Theme parks are one thing, but for some, apparently, restaurants are something else. Japan's largest restaurant review and reservation platform, Tabelog , operates separate booking systems for domestic and inbound customers. On the English, Chinese and Korean versions, users must enter a credit card and pay a ¥440 per person system fee at the time of booking. The domestic site requires no card and charges no such fee. The logic here is that foreign customers bring different transaction costs, and the platform passes them along. Then there's the case of the seafood buffet restaurant in Shibuya that sparked a backlash on Reddit and X earlier this year. The shop, Tamatebako, charges foreign tourists ¥1,100 more than Japanese nationals and foreign residents for its all-you-can-eat course, verifying status by checking if customers can speak Japanese or by requesting a residence card. 'Considering the rise in labor costs due to service costs and time used to serve [foreign customers], we have no other choice but to set the different prices,' the restaurant owner told Yomiuri Shimbun . These explanations didn't land well. On social media, users accused the restaurant of 'being horrible racist, discriminatory xenophobes,' as one commenter put it. Long-term residents voiced a different frustration — the fear of being misclassified. 'And um, how do they know? When I've been here for two decades I'm not a goddamn tourist, despite what everyone thinks,' one wrote . The debate spread beyond Shibuya. When a tonkatsu restaurant in Asakusa announced plans for a 10% service charge 'for foreign tourists,' another thread lit up. 'Imagine the face of Japanese tourists if Paris restaurants started to charge them more than the displayed menu. (A tale that won't happen, as it would be highly illegal here),' a French commenter wrote . The Global Norm Before we get too precious about this, let's acknowledge the obvious: Charging visitors more is normal almost everywhere. India's Taj Mahal charges foreign visitors 1100 RS, or roughly $12 — over twenty times the domestic price. France's Louvre Museum is free for residents of the European Economic Area under 26. Everyone else over 18 pays €22. Many U.S. national parks have lower entry fees for state residents and higher rates for out-of-staters. In Southeast Asia, 'foreigner rates' at attractions are so common they're part of the travel budget. The justification is consistent: Locals help pay for the upkeep of these sites through taxes. Visitors do not, so they make up the difference at the gate. It's not discrimination; it's fiscal logic. Japan already has its own reverse example: the consumption tax exemption . Foreign tourists and temporary returnees can avoid paying the 10% sales tax on a wide range of purchases. It's effectively a nationwide 'tourist discount.' 'We get the 10% tax free benefit on pretty much everything. I don't mind paying a bit more for the food,' said a user on Reddit. Why People Are Talking About Two-Tier Pricing in Japan Two-tier pricing isn't new to Japan — it's just more visible now. The conditions are perfect for it to spread. The yen's slide has made the country absurdly cheap for visitors paying in dollars or euros; that omakase dinner that would cost $250 in New York is ¥12,000 here, and a coffee that's $5 in Paris is ¥400 in Tokyo. Tourism is surging, with over 36 million visitors in 2024 — the highest number ever — and the influx is concentrated in a few already-strained regions like Tokyo, Kyoto, Osaka, Okinawa and Hokkaido. Inbound tourists spend a substantial amount per person, averaging around ¥227,000 in 2024 . Without differentiated pricing, locals risk being priced out of their own neighborhoods as businesses raise prices to match what tourists are willing to pay. Two-tier pricing is, in that sense, a way to keep services accessible to residents. When It Works — and When It Doesn't Hawaii's kamaʻāina discount is the textbook example: Show proof of residency, get a reduced price. It's transparent, consistent and residency-based. It doesn't matter what you look like, what passport you hold or what language you speak — it matters whether you live there. Japan could apply the same logic to attractions, restaurants and services in tourist-heavy areas. For places funded in part by local taxes — museums, gardens, heritage sites — the justification is even stronger. So the problem isn't the principle of two-tier pricing. It's the execution. Too often, 'tourist' is defined by sight alone. If you look foreign, you might be charged more. If you speak accented Japanese, you might be charged more. When tourist prices are decided on sight, long-term residents — people who've lived in Japan for decades, pay taxes and raise children in Japanese schools — can find themselves erroneously paying 'tourist' rates based on their appearance. One foreign resident said on Reddit: 'There are levels to which this is acceptable. But it's a slippery slope and I'm not looking forward to having to explain that I'm not a tourist to restaurants profiling customers.' In other words, it's about more than money. Being treated as a 'visitor' in your own neighborhood cuts deeper than a 10% surcharge. Discover Tokyo, Every Week Get the city's best stories, under-the-radar spots and exclusive invites delivered straight to your inbox. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy . The Real Fix Let's be clear: Charging tourists more is not scandalous. A ten-percent upcharge on a meal that costs half what it would in London or New York is hardly exploitative. If you're flying across the Pacific for a vacation, you can afford seventy extra yen. As one Reddit user put it: 'I think people coming here in endless hordes to exploit the weak currency can probably afford an extra dollar here and there. This goes especially true for things which I think ought to be giving priority to locals.' For short-term visitors who bristle at paying a bit more, it's worth remembering that Japan's omotenashi — its ethic of generous, anticipatory hospitality — is a cultural offering, not an open invitation to extract maximum value at minimum cost. When pricing is transparent, residency-based and tied to real economic factors like tax contribution, it's a practical tool for balancing tourism and local access. Japan has every right to use it, especially in tourist-heavy areas where demand from abroad distorts the market. The problem comes when the criteria are vague and enforcement is left to a glance at someone's face. That's when policy slides into prejudice. If Japan wants to charge tourists more, it must set clear rules and remove subjective judgment from the equation. A national standard — with definitions, documentation and guidelines — would prevent the current patchwork of ad hoc decisions and awkward confrontations at the counter. Here's the harder truth: If Japanese wages kept pace with other developed economies and the yen regained its purchasing power, the gap between what locals can afford and what tourists are willing to pay would shrink. The whole debate over two-tier pricing would fade into the background. Until then, the question isn't whether Japan can charge tourists more — it's whether it will do so with the clarity and fairness that respects both the residents who live here and the guests passing through. Related Posts Mount Fuji To Double Toll Fees Next Year To Address Overcrowding Mayor Considers Quadrupling Himeji Castle Entry Fee for Tourists
Nikkei Asia
6 hours ago
- Nikkei Asia
China promises to address India's rare earth requirements
India's External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, left, shakes hands with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing, July 14. (Xinhua via AP) KIRAN SHARMA August 19, 2025 20:34 JST NEW DELHI -- In a major diplomatic breakthrough, China has promised to address India's concerns regarding Beijing's export curbs on rare earths, tunnel boring machines and fertilizers.
Nikkei Asia
8 hours ago
- Nikkei Asia
Labubu frenzy quintuples Pop Mart's first-half profit to $636m
Labubu dolls at Pop Mart's flagship store in Shanghai in June. The popularity of the toys has fueled the company's rapid rise. © Reuters WATARU SUZUKI August 19, 2025 18:58 JST SHANGHAI -- The global frenzy over Labubu toys fueled a nearly fivefold rise in Chinese toymaker Pop Mart International Group's net profit in the first half of the year.
