Trump—Executor of America's Last Will

Any nation's cargo ship, transporting any goods from any direction, must pass through waterways where the United States holds decisive influence—or even the power to impose a blockade. This is a way to control the lifeline of global trade without maintaining military bases worldwide. This is where true strategic brilliance lies—exerting potential control over the largest possible volume of global trade flow through the fewest possible chokepoints. Layer Four of Resource Lockdown: Shedding Burdens Lockdown isn’t merely about acquiring assets—it also means eliminating liabilities. The two heaviest burdens Trump has most aggressively shed are Europe and the Middle East. Regarding Europe, during his second term, Trump has repeatedly stated publicly that the U.S. should no longer serve as the world’s policeman; allies must pay more for their own security, or else the U.S. will reassess its commitments. How costly is NATO to the U.S.? The combined expense—including maintaining troops in Europe, providing implicit security guarantees to Europe, and delivering military aid in the Russia-Ukraine conflict—amounts to astronomical sums. By demanding Europeans foot the bill, Trump is effectively declaring: 'I’m exiting this business.' Ukraine’s ceasefire likewise represents burden-shedding. Trump has openly tied ending the war to his political legacy—meaning negotiation windows are shaped not only by battlefield developments but also by electoral cycles. The Ukraine war drains hundreds of billions of dollars annually from the U.S. budget, with no end in sight. Trump cares little about who wins or loses—he wants to stop spending that money. In the Middle East, confronting Iran may appear to increase short-term investment, but viewed over a longer horizon, the goal is to eliminate the region’s greatest source of instability—thus paving the way for the U.S. to drastically reduce its military presence there. A nuclear-free Iran, stripped of missile capabilities and naval power, would allow the U.S. to confidently scale back its regional garrisons. Locking down resources while shedding obligations—these two actions jointly define a single strategic direction: building a self-sufficient North American fortress. The Real Meaning of Tariffs Finally, tariffs—the most widely misunderstood element of this entire strategy. Most people interpret the tariff war as a tool of trade policy—or as targeted punishment against China. But if you accept the framework laid out above, the real meaning of tariffs becomes entirely different. Tariffs aren’t meant to win a global trade war—they’re designed to forcibly rebuild America’s domestic economic cycle. Trump has repeatedly stressed that the core objective of tariffs is to bring manufacturing back to U.S. soil, rebuild America’s industrial base, and reduce dependence on foreign supply chains. An America independent of foreign supply chains is one capable of shutting its doors and sustaining itself autonomously. You won’t need to buy chips from China, clothes from Vietnam, or oil from Saudi Arabia—because you’ll produce everything yourself: energy from North America, rare earths from Greenland, manufacturing at home, and maritime routes under your control. That vision—self-reliance, not global dominance—is Trump’s ideal America. How Coherent Is This Strategy? Now let’s connect all the pieces: Greenland supplies rare earths and access to Arctic shipping lanes; Canada provides oil and grain; Venezuela contributes oil; Panama grants control over Atlantic-Pacific transit; Ukraine offers rare-earth mining rights; neutralizing Iran stabilizes Middle Eastern energy corridors; tariffs compel manufacturing reshoring; and pressure on the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates stimulates domestic demand.

From Surging Steel Shipments to Assessing Trump’s Tariffs’ Massive Impact on U.S. Manufacturing

Executive Summary: Trump’s tariff policy has significantly accelerated the reshoring of U.S. manufacturing. In the first half of 2025, tariff revenue reached $87.2 billion, with steel and automotive sectors benefiting markedly. Cleveland-Cliffs reported record-breaking steel shipment volumes—up 7.5% year-on-year—and substantial financial improvement. Tariffs have not fueled inflation; CPI and PPI data remain below expectations. Through fiscal incentives, market protection, and strategic industrial autonomy, tariffs are reviving U.S. manufacturing—for instance, MP’s collaboration with Apple to restructure the rare-earth supply chain demonstrates tariffs’ structural impact on the U.S. economy. After making tariffs the centerpiece of his economic agenda, Trump imposed steep new duties on steel, aluminum, automobiles, copper, and other sectors, alongside ‘reciprocal tariffs’ calibrated to bilateral trade deficits with individual countries. He claimed these new tariffs would boost federal revenue and shrink the fiscal deficit—without triggering inflation—enabling tax cuts for businesses and attracting greater capital investment into U.S. manufacturing. Yet most media outlets argue that Trump’s higher tariffs inevitably raise U.S. inflation, forcing American consumers to bear the cost—and that using tariffs to revive U.S. manufacturing is a fatal illusion. Jiemian News reported that prices for core goods vulnerable to tariffs rose in June. Citing Zeng Gang, Director of the Shanghai Financial Development Institute, the article claimed that June’s CPI data marked the official onset of tariff-driven inflation—indicating that tariff costs are now passing from firms to consumers and may persist long-term, dragging the U.S. economy into stagflation. Jimu News argued that the U.S. underestimated the difficulty of reshoring manufacturing: American workers are not only expensive but also less productive and disciplined—tariffs alone cannot bridge this gap, rendering the notion that tariffs can save U.S. manufacturing a fatal illusion. However, an increasing volume of data proves such unsubstantiated, qualitative claims overly biased—and confirms tariffs truly function as the ‘bull’s nose’ guiding the U.S. economy. For example, tariffs have indeed generated unexpected fiscal revenue, creating conditions to implement corporate tax cuts stipulated in Congress’s recently passed ‘Great and Beautiful Act.’ According to U.S. Treasury Department data for June, tariff revenue is rapidly replenishing the national coffers. In the first half of 2025—after Trump took office—U.S. tariff revenue totaled $87.2 billion. Data show tariff revenue surged sharply starting in April 2025, when Trump announced implementation of the baseline 10% reciprocal tariff. In June, tariff revenue hit $26.6 billion—4.2 times the year-earlier level, 1.2 times May’s figure, 1.7 times April’s, and 3.1 times March’s. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) tariff analysis shows that, as of end-June, the 25% tariff on automobiles and auto parts generated $10.7 billion in revenue, while the 10% baseline rate yielded over $17.7 billion. The Treasury Department projects future tariff revenue will rank second only to corporate income tax. For example, tariffs have demonstrably failed to drive up U.S. inflation. Although U.S. tariff revenue rose 3.2-fold year-on-year and 20% month-on-month in June, current data indicate tariffs’ impact on domestic prices remains extremely limited.

How Trump’s Tariffs Plus Iran War May Help US Manufacturing

Apr 15, 2026

Economists analyze the impact of Trump's tariffs and the Iran conflict on US manufacturing resilience. They identify cheaper domestic natural gas as a critical competitive advantage for energy-intensive industrial processes.

bloomberg

2026-02-03

Trump Announces Establishment of Historic Critical Mineral Reserve Totaling $12 Billion

2026-03-17

Trump Allegedly Announces $300 Billion Refinery Project with Reliance Industries

2026-04-15

How Trump’s Tariffs Plus Iran War May Help US Manufacturing

2026-04-19

Commodity Traders Abandon Political Neutrality to Align with Trump Administration

2026-04-29

Trump Meets Oil Firms on Possible Months-Long Extension of Iran Blockade