fr.euronews.com
Global Markets Roiled by US Tariffs: AIIB Emphasizes Multilateralism
Economists predict that US tariffs will slow global economic growth and increase inflation; the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) stresses the importance of multilateralism to counteract these effects; the EU threatens retaliation.
- What are the immediate economic consequences of the US tariff announcements on global markets?
- The recent announcement of US tariffs has disrupted global markets, potentially slowing global economic growth and increasing inflation, according to economists. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), with 110 member countries, emphasizes the importance of multilateralism in navigating these trade tensions.
- How is the AIIB, as a multilateral institution, responding to the rise in protectionism and its impact on global trade?
- The AIIB, founded by China, highlights the need for international collaboration to counter the impact of protectionist measures. While acknowledging the challenges posed by aggressive US trade policies, the AIIB expresses confidence in the resilience of global markets and the continued importance of multilateralism.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of escalating trade conflicts between the US and its allies for global economic stability and cooperation?
- The EU's strong response to potential US tariffs, along with statements from French President Macron, suggests a willingness to retaliate against protectionist measures. This underscores the potential for escalating trade conflicts and further disruptions to the global economy. The AIIB's focus on maintaining relations with Washington points to efforts to de-escalate tensions.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the situation primarily through the lens of concern and potential negative consequences of Trump's tariffs. The headline (if there was one, which is not provided) likely emphasized the negative economic impacts. The inclusion of Ludger Schuknecht's optimistic statements towards the end feels like an attempt to balance the overwhelmingly negative tone, but the overall framing remains pessimistic.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral, though terms like "bousculés" (shaken up) and "agressives" (aggressive) carry a slightly negative connotation. While these are arguably accurate descriptors, using milder terms might create a more balanced tone. For example, instead of "agressives," one could use "strong" or "unilateral.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the economic concerns and reactions to Trump's tariffs, but omits discussion of potential political ramifications or social impacts of these policies. It also lacks perspectives from those who might support the tariffs or see potential benefits.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic view of the situation as either 'multilateralism' or 'protectionism', neglecting the complexities and nuances of international trade policy and the possibility of alternative approaches.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses the negative impact of potential trade wars on global economic growth and the resulting threats to decent work and employment opportunities. Increased protectionism and slower growth directly affect job creation and economic stability, hindering progress towards SDG 8.