Global trade is experiencing one of the most significant overhauls in modern history: old borders are disappearing, and the planet’s economic map is being redrawn literally before our eyes. So what has prompted countries and trade unions, which had not found common ground for decades, to suddenly sit at the negotiating table? The answer, as is often the case, is found in Washington.

U.S. Protectionism — A Catalyst for New Alliances

Since Donald Trump returned to the White House, his administration has introduced a number of import tariffs — including 15–20% on goods from the European Union. This decision became not just an economic shock, but a genuine alarm signal for the entire world. Countries began frantically seeking new markets and establishing different rules of the game.

The results were not long in coming. Within a few months, the EU signed three major trade agreements — not only with the South American Mercosur bloc, but also with Mexico and Indonesia. The deal with India is expected to be finalized by the end of the year.

Following the EU’s activity, other countries followed suit. India, after a ten-year hiatus, resumed negotiations with New Zealand. Mercosur not only reached an agreement with the European Free Trade Association but also returned to dialogue with Canada. The UAE, demonstrating remarkable diplomatic energy, signed three bilateral agreements in a single day — with Malaysia, Kenya, and New Zealand.

“What two years ago looked like a utopia is now becoming the norm,” comments Anthony Hagman, senior analyst at the London-based agency Hagman Global Strategies. “The global trade system is undergoing a serious stress test — and, it must be admitted, it is coping. Countries are showing the ability to cooperate even under deep uncertainty.”

U.S. protectionism, therefore, played a role not only as a disruptor but also as a catalyst. It forced the world to think: what if the main buyer suddenly disappears?

“The U.S. accounts for only 17% of all EU trade,” Maroš Šefčovič, head of the EU trade department, stated in a recent Reuters interview. “That means we need to think about the remaining 83%.” His words have become a sort of manifesto for a new European strategy — diversification as a response to external vulnerability.

From Ideological Differences to New Solutions

But it’s not only about the U.S. New alliances are also an attempt to reduce dependence on China, whose control over critical minerals for the “green” transition is becoming increasingly crucial. In this situation, trade agreements become not just an economic instrument, but a geopolitical balancing tool.

Interestingly, even the most steadfast participants are changing. India, traditionally cautious about free trade, is suddenly showing flexibility. France, which for years blocked the EU-Mercosur deal over concerns for its farmers, now seems ready to compromise.

“We are witnessing a shift from ideological disagreements to pragmatic solutions,” notes the Hagman Global Strategies expert. “This is a sign of the maturity of the global economic system: it is learning to adapt through dialogue rather than confrontation.”

However, immediate effects should not be expected from new agreements. According to Reuters, tariff reductions under such deals often stretch over 5–10 years. Meanwhile, tariffs hit wallets here and now.

“Trade agreements cannot be seen as a cure,” explains the Hagman Global Strategies expert. “They are like the foundation for a new building. Construction will take time, but without a solid base, nothing long-term can, of course, be built.”

In the short term, it is unlikely that losses from American tariffs will be offset. According to Bruegel analysts, Trump’s tariffs will impact EU exports by about 0.2–0.3% of GDP. New deals will add a few tenths of a percent growth but will not fully cover the losses, especially considering that exports to the U.S. and China — where demand is also falling — account for around 4% of the EU’s GDP.

Yet the significance of these agreements goes far beyond dry numbers. In conditions where the U.S. increasingly ignores WTO rules and promotes unilateral solutions, regional and bilateral alliances acquire special political weight.

“The EU positions itself as a reliable trading partner for the rest of the world,” Sabine Weyand, Director-General of the European Commission’s Trade Department, stated at a European Parliament session. This sounds both as an invitation to cooperate — and as a challenge to the outgoing order.

New Challenges or Opportunities

However, the “rest of the world” faces a fundamental problem. As Sander Tordoir, chief economist at the Centre for European Reform, notes, most of its participants — the EU, Japan, Canada — have positive trade balances. In other words, they need buyers, not sellers. And the U.S., which accounted for nearly half of the global trade deficit, is effectively leaving the market. “Europe will have to stimulate domestic demand, or it risks stagnation,” Tordoir warns.

Hagman Global Strategies sees it differently: “Stimulating domestic demand is not a challenge, it’s an opportunity. The EU has enormous potential in green technologies, digitalization, and infrastructure modernization. This could become a growth engine that does not depend on external political shocks.”

The world of trade is indeed changing — and doing so at unprecedented speed. The protectionism of one superpower has triggered a chain reaction capable of fundamentally altering the planet’s economic geography. Old blocs are losing relevance, and new alliances are forming on the fly.

It is too early to speak of winners and losers. The next few years will show whether the “rest of the world” can create a sustainable system capable of replacing the departing largest importer.

One thing is certain: the era when global trade revolved around two or three giants is coming to an end. It is being replaced by a world that is more fragmented — but possibly more equitable.