
Trump is doing something no one wants
United States
wrote a pointed letter to the left-wing president of
Brazil
. With typical brio, Donald
Trump
threatened to impose steep tariffs as punishment for, among other sins, the prosecution of Jair Bolsonaro, the former president who is facing criminal charges for his attempt to hold on to power after his electoral defeat in 2022. "This Trial should not be taking place," Trump wrote. "It is a Witch Hunt that should end IMMEDIATELY!"
It caused quite a stir. Yet lost amid the fracas was a much quieter, potentially more consequential document signed just a few days earlier in Brazil: an agreement between Chinese and Brazilian state-backed companies to begin the first steps toward building a rail line that would connect Brazil's Atlantic coast to a Chinese-built deepwater port on Peru's Pacific coast. If built, the roughly 2,800-mile line could transform large parts of Brazil and its neighbors, speeding goods to and from Asian markets.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Select a Course Category
Public Policy
Data Science
PGDM
Others
Degree
Operations Management
Artificial Intelligence
Product Management
CXO
Data Analytics
Data Science
Digital Marketing
Healthcare
others
Leadership
healthcare
Finance
MBA
Project Management
Management
MCA
Design Thinking
Technology
Cybersecurity
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
12 Months
IIM Calcutta
Executive Programme in Public Policy and Management
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Economics for Public Policy Making
Quantitative Techniques
Public & Project Finance
Law, Health & Urban Development Policy
Duration:
12 Months
IIM Kozhikode
Professional Certificate Programme in Public Policy Management
Starts on
Mar 3, 2024
Get Details
It was a neat illustration of the contrasting approaches
China
and the United States have taken to their growing rivalry. China offers countries help building a new rail line; Trump bullies them and meddles in their politics.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
SRM Online MBA – Empowering Future Leaders
SRM Online
Enquire Now
Undo
The surreal first six months of Trump's second stint as president have offered up endless drama, danger and intrigue. By that standard his tussle with Luiz Inácio
Lula da Silva
, Brazil's president, seems like small beer. But it was a revealing moment, illuminating how Trump's recklessness compounds America's central foreign policy problem of the past two decades: How should the United States execute an elegant dismount from its increasingly unsustainable place atop a crumbling global order? And how can it midwife a new order that protects American interests and prestige without bearing the cost, in blood and treasure, of military and economic primacy?
These are difficult, thorny questions. Yet instead of answers, Trump offers threats, tantrums and tariffs, to the profound detriment of American interests.
Live Events
China's astonishing economic rise, coupled with its turn toward deeper authoritarianism under
Xi Jinping
, has made answering these challenges more difficult. China now seems to most of the American foreign policy establishment, and even more so to Trump, too powerful to be left unconfronted by the United States. But this line of thinking risks missing America's best and most easily leveraged asset in the tussle for global dominance with China: Most countries don't want to choose sides between hegemons. They prefer a world of benign and open competition in which the United States plays an important, if less dominant, role.
Nowhere is that truer, perhaps, than Brazil. A vast nation, bigger than the contiguous United States, it is a good stand-in for many of the world's middle powers. Contrary to the famous quip that Brazil is the country of the future and always will be, it has managed to become the world's 10th-largest economy, just a whisker smaller than Canada. It has a long tradition of hedging its relationships with a range of big powers -- the United States, China and the
European Union
-- while trying to advance its ambition to be a key player in world affairs.
As the United States' position as the sole superpower has waned and Brazilian leaders have vied to shape an increasingly multipolar landscape, those efforts have picked up. That has involved, unquestionably, a deepening of its economic and diplomatic relationship with China, its biggest trading partner. Lula traveled to Beijing in May for his third bilateral meeting with Xi since returning to the presidency in 2023, declaring that "our relationship with China will be indestructible."
The two countries are founding members of the BRICS group, a bloc of mostly developing middle-income countries that includes a number of American antagonists -- Russia and, more recently, Iran. American officials have long been wary of BRICS, which has sought in various, mostly marginal ways to thwart American power. But Trump has been outright antagonistic. Last week, as Lula played host to the BRICS summit, Trump blasted off a social media post threatening to slap additional tariffs on any nation "aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS."
Some countries within BRICS would like the organization to be more forthrightly antagonistic to the United States, but Brazil, along with India and South Africa, has been resolutely opposed to turning it into an anti-American or anti-Western bloc. "Brazil knows that China is indispensable and the United States is irreplaceable," Hussein Kalout, a Brazilian political scientist who previously served as the country's special secretary for strategic affairs, told me. "Brazil will never make a binary choice. That is not an option."
Indeed, Brazil has much to lose in alienating the United States, and its growing ties with China are as much a symptom of American vinegar as Chinese honey. It does a huge amount of business with the United States, running a trade surplus in America's favor of about $7 billion last year. America is Brazil's largest source of foreign direct investment, rising steadily over the past decade in everything from green energy to manufacturing. Lula and Trump may be ideological opposites, but if they were ever to meet, they would have plenty of pragmatic reasons to get along.
Instead, Trump has chosen antagonism. Part of his calculation, clearly, is political. But if Trump thought he was helping Bolsonaro's right-wing supporters win back power by undermining Lula, his letter appears to have had the opposite effect. Lula, once one of the world's most popular and celebrated leaders, won a very narrow victory in 2023. His popularity has sagged as he struggles to deliver on his election promise to bring down prices and improve the economy. Thanks to Trump's attacks, Brazilians are rallying around their president.
But the spat shows something deeper and more important. For many rising powers, China's supposedly revisionist designs on reshaping the globe pale in comparison to Trump's shocking use of tariffs, sanctions and military firepower. "From a Brazilian perspective, the country firmly seeking to change the underlying dynamics of the global order is the United States," Oliver Stuenkel, a Brazilian German political scientist who has written extensively about BRICS, told me. America, not China, is the wrecker.
Even as Trump pledged to avoid foreign wars and entanglements, his vision of peace seems predicated on a form of "America first" dominance that invites the chaos he promises to avoid. This stance makes violent confrontation with China, the only real rival to American primacy, seem almost inevitable -- and the return of the grim contestation that characterized the Cold War more likely, whether China desires it or not.
What is certain is that many countries -- rich and poor, declining and rising -- definitely do not want this.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


India.com
10 minutes ago
- India.com
China stuns US, NATO, Japan, Taiwan with its latest hypersonic air-to-air missile, its range is..., big matter of concern for India as...
(Representational image: New Delhi: Face-to-face war between fighter planes is a thing of the past. Air-to-air missiles (AAM) have become the new face of air dominance. These have become the primary weapons for air-to-air warfare, which can bring down a plane from hundreds of kilometers away. Beyond Visual Range i.e. BVR missiles, also known as AAM missiles, have now become the biggest weapon in modern warfare. What does China claim? China has claimed to have taken the biggest leap in this direction. China has claimed that it has tested an air-to-air missile with a range of up to 1000 kilometers in the air. If China's claim is correct, then it means that the definition of air warfare has changed forever. Having a range of one thousand kilometers means that enemy fighter jets will not be able to fly. China can wreak havoc from Japan to Taiwan with these missiles. How powerful is the new Chinese air-to-air missile? Reports in the South China Morning Post say that the Chinese army is developing a new hypersonic air to air missile, which will have a range of between 800 and 1000 kilometers. Experts believe that if this is not China's propaganda and if the report is correct, then it means that this missile can also shoot down the world's most advanced fighter jets like the American F-22 Raptor, B-21 Raider and F-35 stealth fighter jet. According to the report, the speed of this air to air missile can be Mach 5 (6174 kmph) or even more. Why is the world concerned by China's latest air to air missile? The hypersonic speed and such a high range of the air-to-air missile means that it will be the most dangerous missile in the world. In such a situation, the air combat doctrine of America, India, Japan, Taiwan and other countries may need to be redesigned. At present, India is close to developing the Astra-3 air-to-air missile, whose range is expected to be around 400 kilometers. While the range of America's AIM-174B is also around 400 kilometers. The range of Russia's R-37M missile is also between 350 to 400 kilometers. That is, the maximum range of the existing air-to-air missiles in the world is around 400 kilometers, but this one thousand kilometer missile of China can change every strategy and equation. Why is it a matter of concern for India? Indian Air Force currently has Astra Mk-1 and soon, it will have Astra Mk-2 and Mk-3 missiles. But the range of these missiles is between 200 and 400 kilometers. Given the Chinese claim of having a 1000-kilometer hypersonic missile, India will not only have to speed up the development of Astra series missiles but also develop hypersonic air to air missiles. Apart from this, ISRO and DRDO will have to jointly develop such sensors and radar systems that can track hypersonic missiles flying at such a distance in time. Air to air missiles are usually made to shoot down enemy fighter planes as well as surveillance aircraft AWACS, AEW&CS, in such a situation India will have to keep its AWACS, AEW&CS aircraft under security cover.


Time of India
18 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump in Scotland: US President on 'working trip'; golf business, bid for British Open and more
President Donald Trump has begun his fourth overseas visit of his second term, heading to Scotland, his mother's birthplace, where he plans to spend several days at his family-owned golf resorts. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now He is expected to visit the Trump Organization's two existing Scottish golf courses, in Turnberry and Aberdeenshire, with a third course at the Aberdeenshire site set to open soon. This will be Trump's second presidential visit to Turnberry, following his first in 2018. In 2020, ABC News reported that then-US Ambassador to the UK, Woody Johnson, told colleagues he had been asked by Trump to urge the British government to hold the British Open at Turnberry. While the UK government said no such request was made to Scottish officials, Trump also denied having made the request. Following the January 6 Capitol attack, the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews, organisers of the world's oldest golf tournament, the Open, announced it had "no plans" to bring the event back to Turnberry and "will not do so in the foreseeable future." 'We will not return until we are convinced that the focus will be on the championship, the players and the course itself and we do not believe that is achievable in the current circumstances,' the R&A's chief executive said in a statement at the time. During a 2023 interview at Turnberry with British politician and media personality Nigel Farage, Trump claimed, 'Everyone wants to see the Open Championship here. The players, it's their favorite course, number one rated in Europe.' More recently, R&A chair Mark Darbon admitted there are 'logistical challenges' to holding the tournament at Turnberry, which last hosted the Open prior to Trump's purchase of the property in 2014. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now He also confirmed that the organisation met with Eric Trump and other Trump Golf executives a few months ago to explore the possibility. Earlier this year in May, Trump visited Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates on his first overseas visit of his second term, aiming to strengthen ties with Gulf nations. His family's business interests have also expanded in the region, with partnerships on new projects in Saudi Arabia, Doha and the UAE, and involvement in a cryptocurrency venture linked to an Emirati government-affiliated fund. According to his latest financial disclosure, Trump reported hundreds of millions in income from his businesses, including golf clubs and the Mar-a-Lago estate, as well as from products such as watches and fragrances. Despite this, his Aberdeenshire resort reportedly lost £1.4 million last year, per BBC reports. Ethics experts have raised concerns over Trump's overseas travel, suggesting potential conflicts between his presidential duties and private business. Trump's assets are placed in a trust overseen by his children, and officials in his administration have repeatedly dismissed claims of any conflict of interest. 'At this point, he's essentially using the White House as an extension of the Trump Organization and letting the taxpayers pick up the bill,' said Jordan Libowitz, Vice President for Communications at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, speaking to ABC News. The White House described Trump's trip to Scotland as a 'working trip.' The president is expected to hold a bilateral meeting with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and may address the press during his stay. 'President Trump's working trip to Scotland will include a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Starmer to refine the historic US-UK trade deal. Donald J Trump has built the best and most beautiful world-class golf courses anywhere in the world, which is why they continue to be used for prestigious tournaments and by the most elite players in the sport,' said White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers in a statement to ABC News.


Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
NY District Court intervenes in Trump-era education cuts, protects humanities research grants
NY District Court intervenes in Trump-era education cuts A federal court in New York has blocked the cancellation of humanities research grants by the Trump administration, calling the move a likely violation of the First Amendment. The court's decision comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the Authors Guild and other academic organisations after dozens of federal grants were abruptly terminated earlier this year. The ruling, issued by Judge Colleen McMahon of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, halts the defunding of projects that had already been approved by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). Many of the cancelled grants supported work in areas related to diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI), and controversial aspects of American history. Focus on DEI and history projects raised legal concerns According to the court documents, several grants were cancelled because they were perceived to support DEI-related themes or politically sensitive research. One such project involved a scholarly study of the resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s and 1980s. Internal government spreadsheets reportedly flagged such research under 'DEI' categories before terminating the funding. The termination notices also cited executive orders promoting 'biological truth' and aiming to eliminate 'radical indoctrination' — language Judge McMahon found problematic. She concluded that the government's actions appeared to be viewpoint-based discrimination, which is unconstitutional. Authors Guild and scholars challenge the defunding The Authors Guild filed a class action lawsuit in May, arguing that the defunding effort not only disrupted research but also threatened academic freedom and violated due process. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which led the defunding campaign, was accused of bringing federally supported humanities work to a 'screeching halt.' The Guild's case is one of several filed by national scholarly associations, including the American Historical Association and the Modern Language Association. While the judge declined temporary relief for some groups, she ruled narrowly in favor of the Authors Guild to preserve the current funding status until the case is resolved. Court defends academic freedom over political influence In her ruling, Judge McMahon acknowledged that a presidential administration has the right to set policy priorities, especially as the US approaches its 250th anniversary in 2026. However, she clarified that such discretion does not extend to censoring scholarship or punishing projects based on ideology. 'Agency discretion does not include discretion to violate the First Amendment,' the judge wrote. 'Nor does it give the government the right to edit history.' Implications for the future of federally funded research The case now moves toward a full trial, but the preliminary injunction has already been hailed by many in the academic community as a critical defense of intellectual freedom. The decision temporarily protects previously approved grants and signals broader scrutiny of political interference in federally funded education and research. With rising tensions around what should be taught, funded, or silenced in the classroom, this legal battle is shaping up to be a defining moment for the future of the humanities in America. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!