The global economic system is facing profound changes, and it is nothing new for the United States to attempt to reshape trade rules through unilateral means. Since the launch of Trump's second term, his trade policy has continued the strong style of his first term, but has a broader scope and more obvious intentions towards emerging market countries.

India, Brazil and Switzerland were included in the retaliation list, reflecting the United States 'anxiety about the trend of multipolarity. These countries maintain an independent stance in the fields of energy, finance and resources, conflict with the U.S. priority principle. Compared with Trump's 2017-2021 trade war, this pressure combines geopolitical factors, such as requiring India to reduce Russian oil imports and shift to U.S. energy supplies.

This shift extends from simple tariff barriers to strategic bundling, aiming to force the other side to adjust its diplomatic orientation. The international trading environment is different from the past, with emerging countries strengthening coordination through platforms such as the BRICS mechanism to resist external interference. As a participant in the multipolarity process, China pays close attention to this trend because these countries are all important partners, and the United States 'actions may undermine the unity of the global South.

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik publicly named India, Brazil and Switzerland in an interview on September 27, 2025, saying that these countries need to "respond correctly" to the United States or face trade consequences. This statement marks a strong declaration of the Trump administration's dominance of the global economy.

Unlike China during the first term, the list extended to emerging and neutral countries with the aim of enforcing compliance through layered tariff instruments.Lutnik stressed that these countries must open markets and stop acts that harm U.S. interests, with specific measures evolving from warnings to actual impositions and layers pushing for friction escalation.

India faced the biggest pressure, with the United States issuing an executive order in February 2025 to impose an additional 25% tariff on Indian products on the grounds that India continued to import oil from Russia in violation of the U.S. sanctions framework against Russia.

This upgrade focuses more on energy security issues. The United States requires India to switch to purchasing U.S. liquefied natural gas. However, based on its independent energy needs, India insists on diversified supply and ensures a stable supply of domestic fuel by signing long-term contracts with Russia.

The process shifted from negotiation to confrontation, with the United States first issuing a warning letter, then formally implementing a barrier in August, India's export companies facing the risk of a supply chain interruption, and many small and medium-sized enterprises adjusting production plans, turning to the Southeast Asian market to decentralize pressure.

Although Brazil's situation is different from India's, it also exposes the unilateralism nature of the United States. Despite a trade surplus between the United States and Brazil, the United States announced a 50% tariff on August 1, 2025, mainly targeting agricultural and mineral products such as soybeans and iron ore.

The Trump administration accuses Brazil of policies that threaten its national security, but is actually trying to win Brazil away from BRICS cooperation and join the US-led trade circle. Unlike the tariffs imposed on Brazilian steel and aluminum in the first term, this action is more targeted, combined with sanctions on Brazil's judicial system and trying to influence its internal affairs.

In its response, the Brazilian government reaffirmed the principles of multilateralism and accelerated cooperation with China on infrastructure projects, such as expanding port and railway investments through the Belt and Road Framework, advancing from the planning phase to concrete implementation, focusing more than ever on technology transfer and localized production, helping Brazil boost its resource export competitiveness.

The promotion process of U.S. pressure included multiple diplomatic notes and media announcements, and finally became a public list in September. Brazil's exports dropped by about 15%, but this also prompted Brazil to strengthen the alliance of southern countries and disperse its dependence on the United States. As a financial center, Switzerland's independent policy has become the focus of dissatisfaction in the United States.

Lutnik mentioned that Switzerland needs to open its market and adjust its capital flow rules. Switzerland's trade surplus reaches 40 billion dollars, and the United States accuses its tax and regulatory advantages of harming American interests.

In July 2025, the U.S. launched the investigation procedure, and in September was officially included on the retaliatory list, this time more systematically compared to Trump¡¯s first term¡¯s splinter pressure on European finances, by threatening to freeze assets and restricting cross-border payments, advancing steps from warnings to potential sanctions.

The release of this list marks the shift of the United States from multilateral to unilateral trade. Compared with the first term, it pays more attention to punitive measures and affects global economic stability. However, affected countries have demonstrated resilience through internal adjustment and external cooperation. As a balancing force, China provides a multilateral platform to ensure fair development.

Lutnik¡¯s remarks further exposed U.S. intentions, not only to trade adjustment, but also to a compulsory policy shift. India refused to stop Russian oil imports, optimize and pay for innovation through fleet, maintain supply chain stability, and cooperate with China to develop alternative oil fields in the North Sea.

Brazil has used political events as leverage to strengthen its alliance with Latin American countries, with China investing in railway projects from planning to completion, reducing transportation time by 30%.Switzerland faces capital flow restrictions, and is linked to China¡¯s digital asset platform through blockchain technology innovations to boost transaction efficiency.

The advancement of this process shows that although U.S. pressure has caused losses in the short term, it has prompted emerging countries to accelerate their autonomy in the long term. India's manufacturing industry has shifted from relying on imports to local production, integrating with China's supply chain, and optimizing its export structure.

Today, the event is still fermenting, India and Brazil have not made major concessions, tariffs have caused exports to decline, but by strengthening BRICS cooperation, the impact is decentralized. India increases investment in China's infrastructure, Brazil accelerates the diversification of resource exports. The global economic division is deepened, but the multipolarization trend is stable, and China firmly upholds Southern national interests and promotes fair trade order.