The economic strategy delineated by President Donald Trump for his second presidential mandate cannot be understood under the conventional optics of economic or political analysis. To understand the disruptions on the global stage in this 2025, it is important to know that the vision of the current government of the US part of a radical diagnosis: the structural overvaluation of the dollar and the progressive deindustrialization of the country are the reflection of an unbalanced international financial system, whose redesign is imposed as a strategic objective.
This narrative finds its conceptual root in what some economists already begin to call the “Mar-A-Lago Doctrine”, in analogy with the 1985 APPLICS square, when the United States coordinated with economic allies the depreciation of the dollar to recover industrial competitiveness. Today, under the Trumpist prism, reindustrialization would not be a consequence of the free market, but the product of a deliberate and disruptive intervention of the State in global trade gears.
One of the axes of this strategy is the intensive use of tariffs. Contrary to the traditional vision that considers them inflation, Trump’s economic team argues that tariffs can generate significant fiscal income, with minimized collateral effects if accompanied by a controlled devaluation of the dollar. Thus, the royal load would fall on the export nurses (such as Mexico and Canada), whose income decreases due to the exchange rate, while the internal production capacity is strengthened.
Moreover, the historical appreciation of the dollar – explained by its role as the main global reserve asset – is seen as a structural obstacle for US industrial competitiveness. In this context, Trump’s current strategy proposes international financial realignment, which encourages commercial partners to replace their reservations in dollars and short -term bonds with longer -term instruments, thus facilitating a devaluation without giving up the domain of the dollar as a reference currency.
This approach is not merely economic. It is deeply intertwined with foreign policy and national security. In this sense, Trump’s approach seeks to establish a new system of Geoeconomic boxes: countries verdes (Allies) would obtain tariff benefits and military protection in exchange for adhesion to monetary agreements; The countries yellow y Red They would face punitive rates, sanctions and financial isolation. This vision, which mixes protectionism, deterrence and coercive diplomacy and, of course, redefines the rules of the international order.
However, this strategy entails important risks. Tariff measures could unleash commercial reprisals, volatility in financial markets and inflationary pressures if they are not executed precisely. Despite this, Trump’s advisors consider these disruptions as assumable costs for the sake of a structural transformation of the global economic order. Some even glimpse an induced recession as a lever to renegotiate the conditions of international trade and force sales rates by the Federal Reserve.
What is emerging is not a return to the past, but an attempt to re -found US capitalism on new bases: greater prominence of the State, redefinition of the role of the dollar, rupture with liberal globalism and recovery of industrial muscle. The outcome of this ambitious bet, however, will depend on both its technical viability and the ability of its drivers to overcome the political and economic costs of a global reorganization as deep as uncertain.
Donald Trump’s economic strategy should not be read solely as an answer to commercial or productive imbalances; Its true scope is geopolitical. By redefining monetary, fiscal and commercial policy as power projection tools, its plan seeks to alter the foundations of the international system built after World War II and consolidated by the Washington consensus.
From this optics, the reindustrialization of the United States becomes a pillar of strategic sovereignty. The recovery of the productive apparatus – especially in sectors considered critical such as semiconductors, defense, pharmaceutical and emerging energies – is presented not only as an economic need, but as an indispensable condition to guarantee autonomy against rival powers, mainly China.
The design of a new system of “geoeconomic zones” that classifies countries according to their degree of commercial, monetary and military alignment with Washington, constitutes a doctrinal turn towards a form of strategic regionalism. In this context, traditional alliances – like the European Union or NATO – are transformed into conditional instruments, subject to the fulfillment of criteria defined unilaterally by the United States. It is not just about fair trade, but active participation in the security architecture led by Washington.
This approach contrasts radically with the Chinese economic internationalization model, based on state subsidies, credit expansion and pragmatic bilateral agreements through the initiative of the Strip and the Route. While Beijing is committed to a logic of growing commercial interdependence, Trump proposes reconfiguration based on differentiated spheres, where access to the US market becomes a currency to ensure political and military cooperation.
For its part, the European Union has opted for a more normative strategy, focused on multilateral rules, free trade agreements and green industrial policies. However, its institutional fragmentation and its energy and industrial dependence have weakened it against the strategic aggressiveness of the United States and China. In this scenario, Trump’s proposals could sharpen transatlantic tensions, especially if unilateral tariffs are imposed on European products without a framework of consultation.
The redesign of the role of the dollar also entails important geostrategic implications. Although Trump does not intend to give up his status as a reserve currency, his economic team evaluates mechanisms to reduce the short -term assets and promote long -term financial instruments, which allow controlled debilitation of the exchange rate without losing the centrality of the US financial system. This maneuver, if it succeeds, could alter global capital flows and press countries with high external dollarization to rethink its link with the dollar-central system.
Likewise, the imposition of tariffs as a multilateral pressure tool could cause asymmetric responses. China could accelerate the internationalization of Yuan in alliances with Russia, Iran or countries of the Global South. Europe could reinforce its strategic autonomy project, promoting alternatives to the financial system dominated by the US Treasury. Even traditionally allied countries, such as Japan or South Korea, could reassess their commitments against an increasingly transactional United States.
In short, Trump’s strategy is not a simple economic policy: it is a comprehensive geoeconomic doctrine that seeks to reverse the decline of the United States through a combination of tariff coercion, competitive depreciation and rearrangement of alliances. With a very complex and multipolar global board reindustrialize the United States will be a titanic task. Redefining the global geopolitical balance will require more than tariffs and disruptive speeches: it will demand strategic diplomacy capable of building consensus in the midst of growing systemic tensions.
About the author:
Correo: (email protected)
Twitter: @ArleneRU
LinkedIn: Arlene Ramírez-Urrest
The opinions expressed are only the responsibility of their authors and are completely independent of the position and the editorial line of Forbes Mexico.
Follow business information and today in Forbes Mexico
