Repeated shocks risk global trade

DISCUSSION around the consequences of President Donald Trump's economic policies – most notably the increased tariffs on all countries, especially China – has centred on economic costs.
These costs affect both businesses and consumers, manifesting as higher prices for traded goods, a shift in production to less efficient locations and reduced consumer choices when goods are no longer produced or traded.
The focus on economic costs neglects a more impactful and troubling development: a shift in global trade governance and the exchange of goods under it. The US has gone from being the establisher and leader of international trade institutions to being the single greatest threat to their continuation.
Multinational enterprises that have prospered under this system face unprecedented uncertainty and increasingly stark choices between upholding the system and being undercut by competitors forced to circumvent it.
Businesses engaging in international trade and investment have long relied upon rules, principles and norms established under the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1948 and deepened under the stewardship of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) since 1995.
The international system under GATT and WTO supports trade through the elimination of trade barriers including tariffs, quotas and subsidies, by establishing principles of equal treatment and by providing mechanisms to manage disputes between nations and companies.
Continuing business faith in multilateral trade rules and liberalisation is increasingly at odds with the positions of nation-states.
The global financial crisis in 2007 to 2008, China's rapid rise to dominant global manufacturer since joining WTO in 2001 and legitimate concerns with the distribution of trade benefits within countries have contributed to popular backlash against freer trade.
The rise of powerful global corporations that pursue profits rather than sovereign interests has also played on the fears of nation-states that, through liberalisation, have ceded much regulatory autonomy.
Against this backdrop is a world besieged by increasingly frequent major shocks – of human and natural origin. Businesses and nation-states are navigating trade wars, disease outbreaks, military conflicts and intensifying weather events – individually and in tandem.
Discourse typically bundles these shocks together to paint an overall picture of instability, lower confidence and temporary disruption to economic activity. But to appreciate the sustained consequences for trade, the stepwise influence of each major shock deserves further examination.
The first Trump administration's trade war from 2018 provided the first substantial and symbolic shift from trade liberalisation to restriction. It delivered an initial blow to the 'made in China, sold in America' model, prompting conversations in global boardrooms around the need to reduce dependence on production in China.
However, investors were largely unwilling to forgo China's cost competitiveness with the re-export of goods via third countries, particularly in Southeast Asia, being the dominant response. Trade continued within the bounds of international governance.
The Covid-19 pandemic from early 2020 created more substantive fractures between businesses and governments on trade governance.
International institutions proved incapable of mobilising an effective and coordinated health and economic response, with business disruption amplified under diverging sovereign measures.
China's draconian response delivered a goal for its reputation as a reliable production location. While economists and businesses marvelled at the adaptability of global supply chains, governments saw vulnerabilities requiring intervention on national security grounds.
Russia's invasion of Ukraine in early 2022 poured salt into the open wound, sharply highlighting the divergence between corporate interests and those of nation-states.
US-led sanctions on trade with Russia sought to divide markets along geopolitical lines with little regard for business impacts.
The ability of businesses from Russia, China, India and elsewhere to circumvent inadequately enforced sanctions exposed the limits of international and national governance to uphold trade restrictions.
Companies from America, Europe and elsewhere had to choose between supporting sanctions and sustaining profits, with many becoming circumventers. That markets did a better job of navigating sanctions and war than governments did of implementing sanctions reinforced the pandemic fracture between businesses and governments, significantly eroding trust in international trade governance.
It is in this context that Trump 2.0 must be seen as an existential threat to prospects for restoring faith in the system.
The US is now the primary source of economic policy uncertainty and lead antagonist undermining international institutions, imposing and threatening smaller countries with tariffs and hollowing out WTO.
Businesses conditioned by pandemic-induced disruptions and ineffectual sanctions face another choice between wearing tariff costs and being undercut by less scrupulous competitors.
Maintaining support for formal, rules-based and ethical international trade means contending with an increasingly formidable global network of informal actors and activities that outmatch the enforcement efforts of trade regulators.
After all, border processes that have been streamlined and deregulated over decades to encourage seamless and trusted trade cannot be instantly and effectively converted to a punitive enforcement stance.
And neither Trump nor the countries he threatens appear willing to plough resources into tighter trade regulation or have a vision for what enforcement looks like.
Arresting the decline of trade institutions may seem insurmountable in the current geopolitical environment but the alternative is trending towards a future in which governments everywhere cede control of effective trade regulation.
In such a world, the ability of international institutions and nation-states to uphold product standardisation and safety, supply chain resilience and ethical practices is compromised.
Government capacity to raise revenue and manage the macroeconomy is further weakened by growing informality while businesses and consumers pay for the additional risk embodied in less-regulated trade.
The world sans the US must act quickly to reinforce the international system, strengthening international institutions, including WTO.
Space for greater leadership from large emerging economies must be created to forge a collective governance approach for countries across the development spectrum.
Tackling systemic destruction is far greater and more economically consequential than addressing the immediate impact of Trump tariffs. A world in which trade operates outside of good governance frameworks would leave everyone poorer.
Dr Stewart Nixon is the deputy director of research at the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas). The views expressed in this article are solely those of the writer
and do not necessarily represent the views or positions of Ideas Malaysia.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Malaysian Reserve

28 minutes ago

• Malaysian Reserve

A new world order is here. Is your portfolio ready?

Global shifts are challenging US market dominance, putting diversification back in play by IFAST RESEARCH TEAM OVER the period from 1994 to 2024, US equities have consistently outperformed their international counterparts. For many young investors, it's hard to recall a time when the US did not dominate global markets. As a result, global diversification has long been a losing strategy for most investors. Not this year. The 'Liberation Day' market crash sparked by Trump's tariffs has coincided with rallies in other global markets, including Europe and China. While the S&P 500 recovered most of the losses year-to-date, the MSCI AC World ex-US Index is up more over the same period. While periods of underperformance by the US are not unusual, the gap this year has been particularly pronounced. A New World Order is Taking Shape For decades, there has been no bigger winner on the global stage than the US market, with its stellar performance over the years leading to an approximate 63.7% weighting in the MSCI AC World Index (as of 30 April 2025), up from 43.3% back in 2011. And rightfully so. Investors were drawn to America's exceptionalism: Its technological dominance, deep and liquid financial markets, leadership in free trade, willingness to underwriting global security and a government historically seen as a wise steward of the economy. However, president Trump's erratic policies — including his on-again, off-again tariff announcements and escalating trade tensions with China — along with his transactional approach to diplomacy, suggest a significant shift in America's position on the world stage. This has prompted the rest of the world to diversify trade partners, forge new alliances and pursue long-delayed economic reforms to boost growth and economic resilience. The European Union (EU), for instance, has launched a charm offensive to diversify its trade alliances in Asia and beyond. The bloc has resumed long-stalled negotiations with several countries, including India, Malaysia and Thailand. The clearest sign of the EU's renewed urgency is its revived deal with The Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), a South American trade bloc that includes Brazil and Argentina. After 25 years of delay, an agreement was finally reached in December. While major European countries such as France and Poland remain opposed, Trump's tariffs could push them towards ratification. Austria, a staunch critic of the deal, has already abandoned its long-standing resistance to the trade agreement. Furthermore, with the US now stepping back from European security, the continent has significantly ramped up its defence spending. Even German lawmakers have voted to loosen the purse strings, allowing for a huge increase in defence and infrastructure investment — a seismic shift for a country traditionally known for its pacifism and fiscal restraint. The recently concluded UK-EU deal has also drawn a line under Brexit, signalling the start of a much closer relationship. Changes are Afoot in China Five years ago, regulators in China launched a sweeping crackdown on technology companies, casting a chill over the private sector. Now, the mood is shifting. Amid China's economic challenges, the government has recognised that revitalising the private sector is crucial to achieving an economy recovery — a task made even more urgent by Trump's tariff war. President Xi Jinping's handshake with Jack Ma — widely seen as the face of China's private sector but sidelined by authorities since the crackdown — at a symposium this year is the surest signal that the party wants the private sector to thrive again. China has also intensified its efforts to steer the economy toward a consumption-led growth model. A raft of stimulus measures, coupled with a revival in consumer and business confidence, is laying the groundwork for a sustained recovery. The government's strategic focus on artificial intelligence (AI) is also providing new momentum for tech leaders. Meanwhile, the recent revival of China's economic dialogues with Japan and South Korea — both of which have aligned more closely to the US in recent years — suggests that regional powers are reassessing their relationships in response to Trump's tariff-induced uncertainty. At the same time, the economic transformation in Japan continues, with inflation, wage increases and interest rate hikes all becoming entrenched. A virtuous cycle of rising wages and prices will stimulate consumption and capital expenditures, opening up a pathway for stronger economic growth in the longer term. Besides, Japan has shown that it can and will step up to provide international economic leadership. In the absence of the US, Japan has picked up the mantle of leadership in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). As the US retreats from its traditional role as champion of free trade, Japan will likely step up to fill the void and provide trade leadership together with other open-market allies. As a new world order takes shape, the global economy likely to become more balanced, with Europe and Asia shouldering more responsibilities for driving growth and providing international leadership. Against this backdrop, diversification has taken on added importance in our portfolios. An Unprecedented Level of Uncertainty Persists Another reason for diversification: A great deal of uncertainty persists. Start with the tariffs. In just a matter of days, Trump's Liberation Day tariffs have injected the global economy with extraordinary levels of volatility and uncertainty. Trade decisions — along with a slew of other major policy decisions — are now made on Truth Social, often catching even his own advisors off guard. While the tariffs have since been paused, they have not been cancelled. The outcome of ongoing trade negotiations remains uncertain and there's a possibility that the punishingly high tariff rates could be reinstated once the deadline passes. The situation looks increasingly fragile. As if that weren't enough, the legal wrangling over the tariffs have added yet another layer of uncertainty. Most recently, a US trade court blocked the tariffs, ruling that Trump had overstepped his authority — only for them to be reinstated a day later, pending the appeal process. Trade talks will now be complicated by doubts over the administration's authority to follow through on its threats. Rather than offering relief, the development has introduced new complications at the worst possible time. Besides, even if trade deals are struck before the deadline, there's no guarantee they will hold. Given the unpredictable — and often arbitrary — nature of Trump's decision-making, he could very well renege on these deals. With no real clarity ahead, U.S. businesses are faced with an unprecedented level of uncertainty, which has been further compounded by other factors. Lower Market Correlations Help Enhance Diversification As a risk-mitigation strategy, diversification only reduces volatility if the markets involved have low or negative correlations. If all markets move in lockstep, it doesn't matter how many geographic regions you invest — diversification won't reduce risk. This has certainly been the case over the past two decades, as correlations between US and non-US stocks have risen significantly. In other words, most international markets have moved in tandem with the broader US market. To conclude, we're not suggesting an end to US exceptionalism. The US remains the largest and most liquid market in the world. It is also home to many high-quality companies that are dominant in the digital economy and semiconductor space. While it might be easy to boycott a company like Tesla Inc due to the availability of alternatives, it's much harder to avoid companies like Google LLC or Nvidia Corp. Therefore, maintaining exposure to the US remains important. However, for investors who already have a substantial US allocation, a global ex-US exchange-traded fund (ETF) can provide substantial diversification benefits. The views expressed are of the research team and do not necessarily reflect the stand of the newspaper's owners and editorial board. This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition

Free Malaysia Today

28 minutes ago

• Free Malaysia Today

Trump says Iran has ‘maximum' 2 weeks to avert US air strikes

US President Donald Trump is mulling the prospect of joining the war on Israel's side. (AP pic) JERUSALEM : US President Donald Trump said today that Iran had a 'maximum' of two weeks to avoid possible American air strikes, as Israel claimed it has already set back Iran's presumed nuclear programme by at least two years. 'I'm giving them a period of time, and I would say two weeks would be the maximum,' Trump told reporters when asked if he could decide to strike Iran before that. He added that the aim was to 'see whether or not people come to their senses'. Trump's latest comments indicated he could take a decision before the fortnight deadline he set a day earlier, as he dismissed European efforts to end the conflict and said it would be 'very hard' to ask Israel to cease its attacks. 'Iran doesn't want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us. Europe is not going to be able to help in this,' he said. A series of blasts were heard in Tehran yesterday as Israel kept up the massive wave of strikes it says is aimed at stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons – an ambition Tehran has denied. 'According to the assessment we hear, we already delayed for at least two or three years the possibility for them to have a nuclear bomb,' Israel's foreign minister Gideon Saar said in an interview published today. Saar also said Israel's week-long onslaught will continue. 'We will do everything that we can do there in order to remove this threat,' he told German newspaper Bild. 'We already achieved a lot, but we will do whatever we can do. We will not stop until we will do everything that we can do there in order to remove this threat.' As Trump mulls the prospect of joining the war on Israel's side, top diplomats from Britain, France and Germany met their Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi in Geneva and urged him to resume talks with the US that had been derailed by Israel's attacks. French foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot said: 'We invited the Iranian minister to consider negotiations with all sides, including the US, without awaiting the cessation of strikes, which we also hope for.' But Araghchi told NBC News after the meeting that 'we're not prepared to negotiate with them (the US) anymore, as long as the aggression continues'. Trump also said he was unlikely to ask Israel to stop its attacks to get Iran back to the table. 'If somebody's winning, it's a little bit harder to do,' he said. Any US involvement would likely feature powerful bunker-busting bombs that no other country possesses to destroy an underground uranium enrichment facility in Fordo. On the streets of Tehran, many shops were closed and normally bustling markets largely abandoned yesterday. Over 450 missiles fired Many shops were closed on the streets of Tehran yesterday. (AFP pic) Since Israel launched its offensive on Jun 13, targeting nuclear and military sites but also hitting residential areas, Iran has responded with barrages which Israeli authorities say have killed at least 25 people. A hospital in the Israeli port of Haifa reported 19 injured, including one person in serious condition, after the latest Iranian salvo. More than 450 missiles have been fired at the country so far, along with about 400 drones, according to Israel's national public diplomacy directorate. Iran said last Sunday that Israeli strikes had killed at least 224 people, including military commanders, nuclear scientists and civilians. It has not updated the toll since. A US-based non-governmental organisation (NGO), the Human Rights Activists News Agency, provided a toll yesterday based on its sources and media reports, saying at least 657 people have been killed in Iran, including 263 civilians. Israel's military said it struck missile launchers in southwestern Iran after overnight air raids on dozens of targets including a nuclear research centre. In Israel, sirens sounded in the afternoon after missiles were launched from Iran for the second time yesterday. Iran's Revolutionary Guards said they had targeted military sites and air force bases. Meanwhile, a US navy official said an aircraft carrier will be moved closer to the Middle East next week, making it the third in or near the region. 'Madness' 'This is a perilous moment, and it is hugely important that we don't see regional escalation of this conflict,' said Britain's foreign secretary David Lammy, who earlier stated 'Iran can never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon'. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that while Iran is the only country without nuclear weapons to enrich uranium to 60%, there was no evidence it had all the components to make a functioning nuclear warhead. 'So saying how long it would take for them, it would be pure speculation because we do not know whether there was somebody… secretly pursuing these activities,' agency chief Rafael Grossi told CNN. 'We haven't seen that and we have to say it.' Arab League foreign ministers gathered in Istanbul late yesterday to discuss the war, Turkish state news agency Anadolu said, on the eve of a weekend gathering of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned the escalating confrontation is quickly reaching 'the point of no return', saying 'this madness must end as soon as possible'. Switzerland separately announced it was temporarily closing its embassy in Tehran, adding that it would continue to fulfil its role representing US interests in Iran.

Malay Mail

36 minutes ago

• Malay Mail

Trump floats firing ‘numbskull' Fed chair Powell

WASHINGTON, June 21 — US President Donald Trump escalated his criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Friday -- publicly mulling whether to fire the official and appoint himself to the central bank. The Republican leader, who regularly berates Powell over the bank's decisions not to lower interest rates, took to Truth Social to smear the banker as a 'numbskull,' 'moron' and 'obvious Trump Hater.' 'I fully understand that my strong criticism of him makes it more difficult for him to do what he should be doing, lowering Rates, but I've tried it all different ways,' said Trump, who appointed Powell during his first term. 'I've been nice, I've been neutral, and I've been nasty, and nice and neutral didn't work!' Powell's term does not conclude until next year. He has said his dismissal would be unlawful, and that he has no intention of stepping down voluntary if Trump asks. 'I don't know why the Board doesn't override this Total and Complete Moron!' Trump posted. 'Maybe, just maybe, I'll have to change my mind about firing him? But regardless, his Term ends shortly!' Trump lashed out after the Fed held interest rates steady for a fourth consecutive meeting on Wednesday, forecasting higher inflation and cooler growth as Trump's tariffs take hold. The projections were its first since Trump unleashed sweeping 10 percent tariffs on almost all trading partners in April. — AFP