Editor's note: Zhu Chenge, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is an assistant researcher at the Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

U.S. President Donald Trump is once again fanning the flames of a global trade war. Since July 7, he has issued tariff letters via social media to more than 20 economies including the EU, Japan, and Mexico, citing their failure to reach comprehensive trade deals with the United States.

According to the letters, starting August 1, exports from these economies to the U.S. will be subject to punitive tariffs ranging from 20 percent to 50 percent. Brazil is the hardest hit, facing a sweeping 50 percent tariff on its exports.

Even countries that did not receive the letters aren't spared. According to Trump, they too will have to pay a uniform tariff of 15 percent to 20 percent when exporting to the United States.

New tariffs, same old playbook

This latest move is a continuation of the current U.S. administration's global trade war. Since returning to the White House, Trump has made his "America First" approach to trade a top priority on his policy agenda. In Trump's eyes, tariffs are the United States' most powerful weapon. That is precisely why his administration boldly declared in April when it claimed it would secure "90 trade deals in 90 days."

However, the Trump administration has clearly underestimated the resilience of America's global trade partners, and meanwhile overestimated its own ability in negotiations. The 90-day deadline has now passed, and so far, the U.S. has only reached two trade agreements: one with the UK and another with Vietnam, along with a preliminary framework with China. In other words, pressure tactics have failed to produce the intended results.

The letters Trump sent out en masse are highly formulaic, mostly repeating accusations that other countries have inflicted severe trade damage on the United States. Yet, upon closer inspection, these letters reveal two clear signals.

First, the U.S. is eager, perhaps desperate, to strike more deals. Hiking tariffs has become the Trump administration's go-to tactic for responding to domestic political pressure. If other countries resist this pressure, Trump's core campaign promise risks falling flat. Notably, by extending the previous July 9 tariff negotiation deadline to August 1, the administration is buying time in hopes of racking up more agreements.

Second, the U.S. is showing little creativity in how it pursues negotiations. Ironically, Trump's tariff threats have not only alienated foreign governments but also strained America's own trade and diplomatic institutions. As a result, policymakers in Washington have turned away from traditional diplomatic channels in favor of a more confrontational approach. They have abandoned quiet negotiations and mutual concessions, abruptly cut off ongoing talks, and instead imposed hard deadlines on their counterparts. "Punitive" measures across different trade partners are applied with little variation.

Tariffs are about more than just trade

The criteria behind Trump's choice of tariff targets raise an interesting question. Without a doubt, the more than 20 trade partners that received his tariff letters are those he most wants to pressure right now. They include long-standing allies like the EU and Japan, as well as former adversaries such as Iraq. For Trump, no country is allowed to maintain a trade surplus with the U.S., not even its allies. That's why the U.S. has threatened to impose punitive tariffs of 35 percent on key partners like Europe, Mexico, and Canada. These are in addition to sector-specific tariffs on industries including steel and automobiles.

But this isn't just a story about trade. Take Brazil for example. As the country hit hardest in this round of tariff hikes, Brazil has long run a trade deficit with the United States. According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the U.S. recorded a trade surplus of $7.4 billion with Brazil in 2024 alone. Over the past 15 years, that surplus has totaled more than $400 billion. So why would Washington go after such a "friendly" trading partner with a tariff hammer?

The answer lies in the opening lines of the letter. Unlike the standard tariff notices sent to other countries, the White House letter to Brazil begins with a direct political attack on its current government. Trump says Brazil's former president Jair Bolsonaro is the victim of a political "witch hunt" and claims the U.S. must respond to what he calls "Brazil's insidious attack on free elections" and its censorship of American social media platforms.

Brazil's growing role in global governance may also be part of the reason. Just last week, during the BRICS summit in Rio de Janeiro, Trump declared that all BRICS member states "are going to pay a 10 percent tariff" to the U.S. This suggests that his broader suspicion of the BRICS grouping as "anti-American" likely plays a role in his targeting as well.

In short, the latest tariff hikes have little to do with traditional notions of "national interest." Instead, it reflects the personal preferences and political motivations of a few in Washington. These politicians are willing to interfere directly in other countries' internal affairs, and even sideline the U.S.'s trade gains, if it serves their own political agendas. For them, punitive tariffs have become a kind of "skeleton key" that unlocks any door they wish to force open.

New tariffs bring multiple risks to global order

The United States' decision to designate August 1 as a global tariff "doomsday" carries wide-ranging consequences. As most analysts have pointed out, these measures will only send shockwaves through the global economy while offering no meaningful upside.

Even with the abrupt threats issued by Washington, its goal of securing quick trade deals remains far-fetched. The three-week extension the U.S. granted is unlikely to prompt other countries to surrender swiftly, let alone allow for the drafting of more detailed negotiation roadmaps. As such, this round of tariff hikes is likely to remain a political performance on the trade stage, rather than delivering any tangible short-term gains for the U.S.

In fact, it may trigger a new wave of global trade retaliation. While some countries have responded to U.S. threats with quiet displeasure, others have pushed back forcefully, particularly those that believe their core interests are under serious threat.

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was quick to condemn the U.S. attack on Brazil's judicial system. He warned that if the U.S. imposes a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian goods, Brazil will respond in kind. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has also publicly declared that Europe would adopt "proportionate countermeasures" to any trade confrontation initiated by the United States. These two are hardly isolated cases.

Moreover, most of the countries targeted by these punitive tariffs are export-driven economies. Their economic stability depends heavily on exports, especially exports to the U.S., in sectors such as electronics, textiles, and agriculture. Given the low probability of meaningful trade agreements being reached by the end of this month, the risk of a sharp drop in export revenues for these countries is alarmingly high. For some of the less developed Global South countries, the potential consequences could be devastating, possibly triggering full-blown economic crises. If that happens, who will be held accountable for the collapse of these economies or for the humanitarian disasters that may follow?

The U.S. itself will not escape unscathed. Even as it asserts short-term leverage, it risks undermining decades of established security, trade and political relationships. Washington's disregard for other countries' sovereignty, its roughshod approach to diplomacy, and its lack of professionalism in negotiation will severely damage its credibility as a trade partner. U.S. businesses and consumers are also likely to bear the brunt of retaliatory measures. From any perspective, it is hard to see how Washington could be considered a winner in this unfolding global trade conflict.

A new round of conflict or a tedious soap opera

The Trump administration's trade war may be far from reaching its peak, so it is still too early to make definitive judgments about its direction. What is clear, however, is that in the foreseeable future, the United States will continue to place trade at the center of its foreign policy, relentlessly seeking to extract advantage from every trade relationship, whether with rivals or allies.

As a result, we may be drifting further away from a fair and open international trading system. Distrust among countries is likely to deepen, and a more pessimistic global outlook is far from improbable. The U.S. approach is pushing more countries into a "state of exception." Since Trump announced new tariffs in April, Japan immediately declared an economic emergency. In response to the latest tariff threats, EU ambassadors from member states convened for emergency talks. Countries are being forced to make decisions in an atmosphere of growing insecurity.

Sometimes all it takes is the flutter of a butterfly's wings thousands of miles away to trigger a storm. The unraveling of the global economic order may stem from the unilateral moves of just one country. The method the U.S. uses to undermine multilateral trade institutions are quite simple: leveraging its economic size to coerce other countries into making concessions, again and again, and again.

What becomes increasingly clear is that the U.S. is becoming increasingly reliant on this tactic, even at the expense of alternative strategic options. In the repetitive, boilerplate letters sent during this latest round of tariff threats, we once again see the Trump administration's familiar cycle of "threaten, extend the deadline, and threaten again." This pattern is not a sign of strength. On the contrary, it reveals the limits of Washington's leverage and sends an increasingly muddled message to the rest of the world. Even worse, it may only strengthen other countries' resolve to resist U.S. pressure.

Washington's repeated announcements of punitive global tariffs now resemble a tedious soap opera featuring the same worn-out cast, the same predictable plotlines, and the same crude values. But this soap opera is far from entertaining; it is toxic. It reminds us that we live in a world with highly asymmetrical possibilities, where building a rule-based order is slow and difficult, but destroying it unilaterally can happen almost overnight.

Yet this reality shouldn't plunge the world into despair. A majority of countries still believe in and are actively working toward multilateral cooperation in global trade. In a time when a small number of actors are moving against the tide of globalization, that determination is all the more precious.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X, formerly Twitter, to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)