Opinion
Liberation Day Tariffs Miss the Real Target: China
Trump’s blanket tariffs alienate allies, empower China, and risk America’s global economic leadership
The Trump administration’s announcement of blanket tariffs misses the mark. Instead of using a tariff threat to address trade irritants with our allies in order to form an alliance to jointly confront China’s mercantilist practices—the real threat to American economic and technological dominance—these tariffs indiscriminately hit allies and competitors alike. While they are sure to result in some increases in domestic manufacturing, foreign retaliation, as well as US tariffs on intermediate goods, will also mean fewer US exports. And the result will be strained, if not broken, partnerships at a time when America and the West should be laser-focused on countering predatory China’s trade offensive.
With these tariffs, the Trump administration is arguably implementing the worst possible solution to address a problem they have rightly identified. Despite, or perhaps because of America’s leadership in the global trade system (until the day before “liberation day”), the result was a massive trade deficit and deindustrialization.
Yet, U.S. globalists blithely denied that trade deficits matter and that globalization played a key role in hollowing out U.S manufacturing. At the same time, U.S. policymakers gave short shrift to foreign trade barriers as even long-standing allies adopted policies that disadvantaged American firms. Most of our Allies indeed took advantage of the United States by imposing their own trade barriers, and challenging us to adjudicate them at the WTO, which did not work for various reasons. And, of course, at the end of the day, it is China that will ultimately be responsible for breaking the global trading system, given its massive trade and economic distortions that have done so much to harm allied manufacturing economies.
For at least a decade, the writing was on the wall for all to see. Yet, no serious and systematic efforts were made to reform the global trade system to address these systemic imbalances and distortions. Indeed, most in the Washington trade community insulted and mocked anyone who dared say there might be problems, if they even bothered to pay attention to them.
So why are we surprised that Trumpian extremism to break globalization is the response? The reality is that “liberation day” is a natural, albeit likely fatally flawed, result of that self-righteousness, combined with an ill-informed nativism and protectionism from the Trump trade community. Now, the United States has declared a trade war with the rest of the world, treating allies and adversaries as equals. And like a partner who cheats and gets caught, these bonds with allies will likely never be fully restored, even if Trump wrangles deals.
It would be one thing if the Trump tariff wall were effective. At least the United States would benefit from more manufacturing and a lower trade deficit. The reality is that “liberation day” will do little to make the United States more globally competitive and restore manufacturing, especially high-value-added advanced production.
To be sure, “liberation day” measures will mean that some U.S. manufacturers will sell more, and some multinationals might move some production to the United States. But at least six factors are working in the opposite direction.
First, tariffs on intermediate goods will hurt U.S. companies competing in global markets. Higher steel prices mean U.S. auto exports will be less competitive.
Second, tariffs on imported capital goods (e.g., computers, machine tools, etc.) will raise these costs and lead to diminished US capital investment, not just in manufacturing but throughout the economy. That will slow the growth of vitally needed productivity.
Third, most, if not all, other countries will retaliate. Even as the President has said he is open to negotiation (although other top Trump officials have said there will be no negotiations) and will punish retaliators. As this happens, some companies in America will move U.S. operations to other nations to serve non-US markets, as Harley-Davidson and Caterpillar did in 2018.
Fourth, for intermediate goods that pass back and forth across the US border for additional value-added stages, the cumulative tariff stacking will likely lead companies to do all of this work outside of the United States.
Fifth, even if the tariffs do restore some manufacturing, much of that could very well be low value-added products that have no real strategic interest for America, something those in the Trump trade community don’t care about. But the reality is that producing computer chips is vastly more important than producing potato chips. And other nations, who do understand this key difference, could very well respond by reducing exports to the United States of low-value added products, as well as vastly increasing imports of them, along with minerals and agricultural products. All with the objective of getting off Trump’s naughty list by reducing their trade deficit with the United States (the so-called reciprocal tariffs are a simple formula that reflects our trade deficit in goods with these nations). The result would be balanced trade, but the United States would be “winning” by being largely a “hewer of wood and drawer of water.”
Sixth, the tariffs are a gift to Xi Jinping. By placing high tariffs on countries like India, Indonesia, and Vietnam, the incentive for multinationals to move production out of China goes down significantly. More importantly, besides arguably violating many trade agreements the United States has legally agreed to, the tariffs destroy any movement toward a Western alliance to counter China’s goal of setting the rules of the global economy. Just as America’s response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine cemented the alliance between Russia and China, Trump’s tariffs will go a long way toward building economic agreements between China and other nations. Already, Korea, Japan, and China have announced joint actions to respond, while the EU has discussed establishing closer ties with China.
Free-market globalists screwed this up and enabled American losses, and as such, their “solutions” to do nothing other than remove the tariffs are unviable. Hopefully, they will realize this soon. In the vacuum of failed “free trade,” Liberation Day has been the answer.
There is a better solution.
First, the United States should establish a national innovation strategy focused on advanced manufacturing that includes implementing incentives for technology development and diffusion, establishing a National Competitiveness Council to formulate and coordinate advanced-industry competitiveness policies, or providing financial support—for example, creating a Super Chips Tax Credit. Killing the CHIPS Act, the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) Manufacturing Extension Partnership, and cutting federal research spending is just digging the hole deeper.
Second, Trump should approach our allies, one at a time, and confront them with a bill of particulars on the most important trade barriers they have related to US advanced industry development. He should state clearly that his additional tariffs go immediately to zero when these nations have made significant progress in rolling them back. For too long, the United States was too reticent to confront these practices, such as the systematic attacks on U.S. technology companies overseas. It’s not too late for this.
At the same time, rather than tariffs which rightly anger our allies and inevitably lead to tit-for-tat retaliation, the administration should immediately push for a weaker dollar (which has the exact same effect as tariffs) and the implementation of a border-adjustable value-added tax (VAT) that would raise the price of imports and if used to partially lower business taxes, reduce the cost of exports. Allies might squawk but would not retaliate, partly because most have VATs, and many already manipulate their currencies.
Third, the United States will lose the race for advanced industry competitiveness without serious partnerships with our allies. And that means China rules the world. In reality, we are close to having already lost this techno-economic war that China launched almost two decades ago. If Trump forces our allies to be against us and for China, the battle is definitely lost.
Toward that end, Trump needs to adopt an Allied “Huawei” strategy. Absent Trump’s action in his first term to convince allies not to buy Huawei telecom equipment, it is likely that either Ericsson or Nokia would now be out of business, Huawei much stronger, and its future complete dominance likely. However, Trump’s efforts to limit their access to allied markets allowed us to gain a valuable commercial line of defense. The United States and allies need to do this again, but on a vastly broader array of Chinese goods and services, including Chinese company airplanes, drugs, semiconductors, heavy equipment, EVs, and other advanced and strategic industries that China has “cheated” in.
If most of the allies, especially in Europe, had more cohesion and courage, they would be the ones to lead such a system, even as Trump tries to undermine it. But as it stands, they are more than happy to have America be the “bad cop” while they play “good cop” and take the U.S. market share. So, at the end of the day, it probably still comes down to US global leadership. Alas, with Trump’s nationalist protectionism, which is unlikely to come. The end of globalization as we know it, along with the end of America’s techno-economic leadership, is the likely result.
There is a path out of the destruction and defeat that the Trump approach will bring. It’s not too late for the President to implement it. If he did, creating a new type of globalization to address critical current geopolitical challenges, he could go down as one of America’s greatest presidents. As things stand now, he will likely be seen as worse than Herbert Hoover when confronting the Great Depression.
The Washington Eye is an independent news platform founded on a clear mission: to bring truth to light with courage, context, and credibility. We are not just another media outlet — Washington Eye is a sharp, bold vision for modern journalism in a noisy world.
We believe that news should inform, not manipulate. That stories should go deeper than headlines. And that journalism must serve the public, not power.
What We Stand For
🔹 Independent Reporting
The Washington Eye is free from corporate influence and political bias. Our loyalty is to truth and to the readers who seek it.
🔹 Global & U.S. Coverage
From the heart of Washington D.C. to global conflict zones, our reporting spans across politics, economics, social justice, and human stories.
🔹 Critical Thinking
We challenge narratives. We fact-check everything. We ask the hard questions others avoid.
What You’ll Find on Washington Eye:
- Politics: Deep analysis of U.S. government, policy, and elections.
- World News: Geopolitical developments and global affairs.
- Business: Markets, money, and the changing economy.
- Opinion: Thought-provoking insights from independent voices.
- U.S. Focus: Stories that matter to Americans, from coast to coast.
A Platform with Purpose
The Washington Eye exists to empower citizens through accurate information and fearless storytelling. We’re here to shed light — not add to the noise.
Whether you’re a reader, contributor, or simply curious, you’re welcome to be part of a news movement that values clarity, truth, and depth.
Washington Eye — Journalism That Sees Through the Noise.
Business
From Barter to Bitcoin: The Journey and Future of Currency
Currency is trust, coordination, and stability; without it, society and global trade collapse rapidly
by: The Washington Eye
Currency is one of the most significant inventions in human history, yet many of us overlook its importance in our daily lives. At first glance, money seems simple—coins in your pocket, bills in your wallet, or digital numbers in a bank app. But beneath its surface lies a complex system of trust, governance, and economic coordination. Currency works because people believe it works. It is not just a tool for buying and selling; it is a shared agreement among individuals and institutions that a certain object—whether paper, metal, or digital code—holds value and can be exchanged for goods and services.
Before currency came into existence, human societies relied on the barter system. In barter, people exchanged goods and services directly. This method, while natural in small communities, had major limitations. It required a double coincidence of wants: both parties had to want what the other had. If you had wheat and wanted shoes, but the shoemaker didn’t want wheat, you couldn’t trade. Currency solved this problem by serving as a universally accepted medium of exchange. Early currencies included commodities like salt, cattle, or gold—items considered valuable and difficult to fake. Eventually, these evolved into coinage and paper money, often backed by physical commodities such as gold and silver. In modern times, we use fiat money, which has no intrinsic value but is declared legal tender by governments and accepted because people trust the system behind it.
Today, central banks and financial institutions manage currency through complex tools like interest rates, inflation targeting, and money supply regulation. When handled well, these tools can stabilize the economy, foster investment, and generate employment. But mismanagement—such as excessive money printing—can lead to disastrous consequences, including hyperinflation. Historical examples like Zimbabwe or Venezuela demonstrate how quickly a currency can become worthless when public trust is lost. Without faith in currency, prices skyrocket, savings vanish, and economies collapse.
Now imagine a world without currency. Would we return to barter? Perhaps, but that would bring back the same inefficiencies that currency was invented to solve. More likely, alternative systems would emerge. These could include commodity money like gold or oil, decentralized digital currencies such as Bitcoin, or even systems of social credit or labor exchange. Each of these, however, has its flaws. Cryptocurrency, for example, promises decentralization but remains volatile and vulnerable to speculation. Commodity money might favor nations rich in resources and deepen inequality. Social credit systems, while potentially fair, could also become tools of control and surveillance.
A world without currency would likely cause global trade to collapse. Currency provides a common unit of account that allows us to price goods, calculate profits, and manage contracts. Without it, international transactions would become chaotic. Supply chains would stall, and financial markets would lose their foundations. Moreover, debt and long-term contracts rely on stable money. Without currency, these agreements lose meaning. Lending would slow down, investments would halt, and the global economy would become stagnant.
Some idealists imagine a future where money is no longer needed—where technology, automation, and abundance make everything freely accessible. In such a society, resources could be distributed based on need rather than ability to pay. This vision, promoted by movements like The Venus Project, presents a post-currency economy guided by logic and sustainability. But achieving this would require more than technological advancement. It would demand a radical transformation in human behavior, moving from competition to cooperation, and from ownership to shared access. Such a shift, while theoretically possible, is not likely in the near future.
Ultimately, the question is not whether we can eliminate currency, but how we can use it more equitably. As the world becomes increasingly digital, currencies will continue to evolve—through blockchain, central bank digital currencies, and global financial reforms. But the fundamental role of currency as a tool for coordination and trust will remain. Rather than dreaming of a currency-free utopia, our focus should be on building systems that make currency work for everyone, not just the privileged few. Currency is not just about money; it is about meaning, fairness, and the structure of our economic lives. Without it, society as we know it would unravel.
Opinion
The Middle East Bermuda Triangle for Peace and Security
Middle East stability requires KSA-USA-Israel alliance, countering Iran and China, ensuring regional peace
The decades of wars and tensions in the Middle East have reached a point of no return and any ceasefire will not cut the deal for peace and stability in the region. Which is a requirement for the New Middle East and a New World Order by 2030. Therefore, the scenarios of the geopolitics of the region are no longer a classic one with Iran as the “Torch” holder of hegemon. The aging and decaying system of Iran exemplified by the so-called Ayatullah Khamenei the Supreme Leader, becomes irrelevant in a futuristic worldview.
A system based on false theology, or an apocalyptic mission, will only serve as the axis of evil. Such mission was rapidly spreading in the last few years by a movement called “Shiatization” of the world, which is basically a global movement aims to manipulate youth around the world to become paramilitary soldiers implementing a prophecy of the resurrection or “the reappearance” of the 12th Imam Mohammed Al Mahdi a descendent of the Prophet Mohammed according to the Shia sect of Islam. It is important to note that based on this myth; a false claim the Quran does support; the Shiatization movement has a significant role of destruction and in creation of a total dystopia as a pre-requisite condition for “the reappearance” to happen.
Therefore, the Middle East and particularly the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) have stepped in as a prominent power in the region with a clear vision of 2030 for the Middle East. The KSA under the Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS) have taken bold steps to strengthen the relationship with the United States with President Trump in Office. The two leaders of a vastly different worlds and backgrounds, have significant and noticeable friendship as business men and Heads of States. The world witnessed the success of the Saudi-American Economic Forum in Riyad in May 2025, and massive investments for years to come. Granting the sanctions lift of Syria and allowing its new leadership to have a chance to stabilize Syria and save the lives of millions of the Syrian people, meant a lot for MBS and showed confidence in his regional leadership. Same goes with the other Gulf Countries during President Trump’s visit to the region to ensure that Arabs are solid allies to the United States of America. What is remarkable about Trump and MBS, is that both share the undeniable prospect of the Middle East once it has peace and stability in place. The 2030 vision of the Crown Prince MBS is that eliminating the Iranian/IRGC intrusive violent interference of the proxies in Iraq, Syria (under Assad), Lebanon with Hezbollah, Houthis in Yemen and Hamas in Gaza. Only then, the alliance of Arab nations could enter into real peace agreements with Israel.
Furthermore, the U.S.-Israel relationship will also need to step up given the decades of alliance and ironclad ties, Israel, cannot live in isolation from its regional neighbors. Thus, a Bermuda Triangle must be secured as KSA-USA-Israel. The US as the trusted ally to both countries, and Trump as a trustworthy leader to both MBS and Benjamin Netanyahu. Both who might seem rivalries, they are in fact have more in common including a core value of peace and security in the region. The tactics or approaches might differ significantly, but that can be addressed through soft-diplomacy the trademark of KSA, not the arm twisting, but rather building on common grounds. For instance, both leaders count on the peoples in the region, Arab Muslims, Kurds, Druz, Christians, Jews, Persians, Bloshs, Azaris, and many other ethnic and religious minority groups. Both leaders want to establish and secure economic prosperity and wealth of resources including sustainable energy resources and agriculture. Therefore, if President Trump could bring KSA and Israel to the negotiation table with realistic expectation rather than selling new maps, the future of the region would very well be worth every effort for peace.
Finally, how Middle East Bermuda Triangle effect the United States? i.e. what is the Return of Investment for the America First and Make America Great Again? The wealthy region will be entirely a strong ally to the US, not only economically, but also in every industry concerns the American superiority such as the energy, minerals, trades, water passages, and overall presence. The Middle East peace and security or as I call it the “Bermuda Triangle” will be a massive buffer zone against China which is creeping into Africa using Iran as its proxy which is actively spreading the Shiatization movement that entails more terrorists’ organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, and the militias in Iraq. The alliance between Iran and Egypt and Algeria is not for bilateral diplomatic relations, but rather a destruction power to threaten Israel and to sabotage the West Sahara Desert Agreement with Morocco. China through Iran will increase their exploitation to African countries to ensure destabilization and attacks on U.S. interests in the continent. In addition, the China-Iran alliance have funded operations, based on open-source intelligence reports, to reach American soil by exploiting open border policy of the Biden Administration, and have established training and grooming camps in Cuba and Venezuela.
In conclusion, the Bermuda Triangle Peace and Security of the Middle East through the U.S., the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Israel is a necessity for world peace and security; by forcing the Islamic Republic of Iran to hand down its torch of hegemon by Peace through Strength Policy of the U.S. of the Trump Administration. The power of KSA and Israel together will hold the fragile region together and build it up from ruins. The KSA legitimately can unite the Arab countries for peace and stability without leaving Israel in isolation. While the U.S. will have a greater presence with solidified allies and partners to counter the greater global threat of China and its proxy of Iran.
The Washington Eye: A Bold Vision in Global and U.S. Journalism
Swipe, Post, Apply: U.S. Turns Social Media Into a Visa Gatekeeper
End of an Era: Anna Wintour Steps Down at Vogue After 37 Years
-
Business5 months agoWhy Are Planes Falling from the Sky?
-
Opinion5 months ago
How I Spent My Week: Roasting Musk, Martian ICE, and Government Absurdities
-
Business3 months ago
Trump’s ‘Gold Card’ Visa: Citizenship for Sale at $5 Million a Piece
-
Politics4 months ago
Trump and the New World Order
-
Politics7 months ago
Comrade Workwear Unveils ‘Most Wanted CEO’ Playing Cards Amidst Controversy
-
Politics6 months ago
The Changing Face of Terrorism in 2025
-
Opinion6 months ago
From Le Pen to Trump: The Far-Right Legacy Behind a Presidential Comeback
-
Opinion6 months ago
2025: The Turning Point in Global Power and Security
