Trump's tariffs will only accelerate de-dollarization
Speaking to RT, the general secretary of the Communist Party Marxist – Kenya described the planned tariffs as part of a broader strategy aimed at what he characterized as 'rescu[ing] the strategic decline of the US imperialism.' He argued that rather than weakening the BRICS countries, such measures would likely expedite their efforts to trade in national currencies and develop an alternative financial system.
'If the tariffs were actually aimed to isolate particularly China, Russia and the countries of the BRICS, then it will actually reinforce the currency swipe strategy that is currently ongoing and can only deepen the trade in the national currencies of the BRICS countries, and actually to accelerate an alternative financial system and challenge to the dollar supremacy,' Omole remarked.
Speaking at a cabinet meeting on Tuesday, President Donald Trump confirmed that the US would impose new tariffs on BRICS members 'pretty soon.' He added that, 'If they're a member of BRICS, they're going to have to pay a 10% tariff – and they won't be a member long,' according to Reuters.
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said recently that the group's cooperation is not meant to confront anyone in particular, and that it is 'really disappointing' that BRICS is seen 'in negative light.' Omole said that Ramaphosa's statement was necessary, but that the influence of the group would continue to rise. 'Even though President Ramaphosa might appear diplomatic, but indeed BRICS is accelerating the permanent decline of the US empire,' he asserted.
Speaking on the sidelines of the Ministerial Conference of the Russia-Africa Partnership Forum in November, Mashood Jacob Ajene, an expert with the Africa-Russia Research Centre in Ghana, told RT that moving away from dependence on the US dollar could transform Africa's economic future. 'The US is very powerful because of the dollar, and the dollar is only a paper,' Ajene remarked, saying that Africa's reliance on the dollar constrains its potential.
BRICS was established in 2006 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China, with South Africa joining in 2010. Over the past year, the group has extended full membership to Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates, and Indonesia. The bloc's partner countries include Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
The Americans are leaving — and the post-colonial world is fine with that
A shift appears to be underway in US-Africa relations, judging by the remarks of Vice President J.D. Vance and AFRICOM Commander General Michael Langley. Speaking to new US naval graduates on May 23, Vance talked about re-evaluating the American military role around the world and declared that 'The era of uncontested US dominance is over" and that open-ended military engagements 'belong to the past.' Four days later General Langley, while attending an African defense chiefs' meeting in Gaborone, Botswana, suggested that the US Africa Command (AFRICOM) might be integrated into Central Command (CENTCOM). 'If we're [AFRICOM] that important to (you), you need to communicate that and we'll see,' Langley said, adding that the US is 'reassessing' its military role in the continent. This sends a clear signal that Washington may dismantle or repurpose AFRICOM as part of broader cuts to US global military posture. The statements, in line with President Donald Trump's 'America first' mantra, reflect Washington's growing impatience with costly foreign entanglements, while hinting at a fundamental transformation of how the US engages with Africa's complex security landscape. Since its creation in 2008, AFRICOM has served as the centrepiece of US military strategy on the continent. Over nearly two decades, the command has expanded its reach and budget significantly, shaping security partnerships and playing a pivotal role in regional conflicts. Yet today, AFRICOM's future is uncertain, caught at the crossroads of shifting US priorities, rising African assertiveness, and intensifying competition from rival powers such as Russia and China. Africa has long figured into the broader framework of US global military and political strategy. During the continent's era of anti-colonial struggle and liberation movements, Washington, obsessed with countering Soviet influence, viewed nearly every liberation movement through the narrow lens of Cold War anti-communism. AFRICOM was established by President George W. Bush, who emphasized its importance by stating that it would 'strengthen our security cooperation with Africa and create new opportunities to bolster the capabilities of our partners.' AFRICOM was intended to centralize US military operations on the continent, replacing the fragmented structure inherited from the Cold War era, when Africa was divided among three different US military commands. Then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates described the move as a long-overdue correction to an 'outdated arrangement left over from the Cold War.' Between 2008 and 2025, the cost of sustaining AFRICOM and financing its activities is estimated to have risen from around $50 million to between $275 million and $300 million. It is not a huge amount because the command borrows personnel and equipment from other US military commands, meaning the cost is accounted for anyway. This is likely to draw scrutiny from President Trump, who has made slashing federal spending a key priority. His administration has launched a dedicated initiative within the Office of Management and Budget – dubbed DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) – to identify and eliminate what it considers excessive international and domestic expenditures. Trump's return to office in 2025 marked a clear strategic pivot: a retreat from costly overseas commitments in favor of a narrow, transactional approach to foreign policy. The Sahel region illustrates the consequences of America's retrenchment in Africa. Once a central focus of US counterterrorism efforts, countries such as Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso have witnessed the gradual reduction of American military presence amid growing local resistance. Coupled with political upheavals and anti-French sentiment, US forces have faced mounting pressure to leave or scale back operations. The withdrawal has left a security vacuum that regional powers and international actors struggle to fill, fueling instability and humanitarian crises. This retreat highlights the limits of America's influence and the complexities of African geopolitics in an era of shifting alliances. A stark example of the US pullback is Niger, where the military coup in 2023 prompted the expulsion of American forces and the shutdown of a $100-million drone base critical to regional surveillance and counterterrorism. The abrupt exit underscored the fragility of US military footholds amid shifting political dynamics. Meanwhile, Russia has swiftly moved to fill this security vacuum, leveraging military cooperation, renewed political ties with the region and arms deals to become a preferred partner for several African states. Moscow's approach – often perceived as less conditional and more respectful of sovereignty – has resonated with governments disillusioned by Western interference and demands, accelerating realignment in Africa's security landscape. African nations approach foreign military partnerships with a mix of pragmatism, skepticism, and growing assertiveness. Many governments are wary of traditional Western powers, associating them with a legacy of colonialism, exploitative aid, and conditional alliances that undermine sovereignty. In contrast, Russia's more transactional and less intrusive engagement style appeals to some leaders seeking security support without political strings attached. However, this trust is far from uniform – some African civil society groups and international observers often warn against swapping one form of dependency for another, emphasizing the need for genuine partnerships that respect African agency and prioritize long-term stability over geopolitical rivalry. African countries' relative trust in Russia compared to the US or former European colonial powers stems from historical and ideological factors. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union supported numerous African liberation movements, often standing in opposition to Western-backed regimes and colonial interests. Unlike Western powers, Russia's approach has often emphasized non-intervention in internal politics, focusing primarily on military cooperation and economic deals without pressing for political reforms. This contrasts sharply with Western demands for governance changes as a precondition for aid or security support. As Malian analyst Amina Traore noted, 'Russia does not come with lectures or conditions; it offers partnership based on mutual respect and shared interests.' Similarly, Senegalese former defense official Cheikh Diop remarked, 'African countries want security partners who respect their sovereignty and do not drag them into endless conflicts or political battles.' These sentiments underscore why Russia has gained ground as a preferred security ally, even as questions linger about the long-term implications of this pivot. The possible disappearance or transformation of AFRICOM signals a shift in US military engagement across Africa. Whether integrated into other commands or scaled back significantly, this change reflects Washington's recalibration of its global military priorities amid domestic pressures and evolving international dynamics. For Africa, the retreat of a long-standing security partner opens a strategic vacuum – one increasingly filled by Russia and other global actors eager to expand their influence. The shift challenges US policymakers to rethink their approach beyond military presence, emphasizing genuine partnerships based on respect, shared interests, and support for African-led security solutions. Ultimately, the future of US-Africa relations will depend on Washington's ability to adapt to a multipolar world where influence is no longer guaranteed by military might alone, but by diplomacy, economic engagement, and mutual respect.
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
US slaps visa sanctions on Cuban president
The US has placed visa restrictions on Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel, accusing Havana of human rights violations. Cuban Defense Minister Alvaro Lopez Miera and Interior Minister Lazaro Alberto Alvarez Casas have also been blacklisted. In a statement on X on Friday, Rubio accused the Communist authorities in Cuba of corruption and mentioned the 2021 anti-government protests and clashes in Havana. 'Four years since the Cuban regime's brutal crackdown on protestors, the State Department is restricting visas for Cuban regime figureheads … and their cronies for their role in the Cuban regime's brutality toward the Cuban people,' he wrote. 'The United States demands immediate proof of life and the release of all political prisoners,' Rubio added. Cuban officials have claimed that the US incited the 2021 unrest by exploiting economic hardships in order to topple the government. In May, the US imposed sanctions on three Cuban judges and a prosecutor for their role in the imprisonment of protester and activist Luis Robles. In 2025, Robles was released after serving nearly five years behind bars. The island nation has remained under a US trade blockade since the 1960s. US President Donald Trump has reversed the Obama-era attempts at normalizing relations and earlier this year reinstated Cuba to the list of state sponsors of terrorism. The Cuban Foreign Ministry has vowed to resist the US 'imperialist and interventionist' policies. 'We are free, sovereign and independent, and we are going to continue building our revolution, despite the tightening of the blockade,' Diaz-Canel said last year. Russia and China have repeatedly condemned US sanctions against Havana. In an op-ed published in Cuba's state-run newspaper Granma in May, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called for the lifting of the 'illegal' economic blockade.
Russia Today
7 hours ago
- Russia Today
Iran sets terms for resuming nuclear talks
Iran has signaled it is open to resuming dialogue with the US, but only under strict conditions, following Israeli and American strikes on its nuclear facilities, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has said. The sixth round of indirect talks, scheduled for June 15 in Oman, was canceled two days earlier after Israel launched airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites and senior military figures – an escalation Tehran called a declaration of war. The dialogue, revived earlier this year by US President Donald Trump, collapsed in the wake of the attacks. Washington joined the hostilities on June 22, deploying heavy bombers against key nuclear facilities. Trump later argued the sites had been 'completely obliterated,' a claim disputed by multiple media reports. In a written interview with Le Monde published on Thursday, Araghchi condemned the attacks as a violation of international law and said it was the US that 'broke off' negotiations and turned to military action. He added that Tehran remains committed to diplomacy but stressed that any renewed engagement must be based on accountability, mutual respect, and, most importantly, 'guarantees against any attack.' Araghchi said that despite the tensions, diplomatic exchanges are still underway via mediators. The US State Department claimed this week that Trump is committed to peace with Iran. 'Our commitment has been steadfast through all of these conflicts and now is a time for Iran to take advantage of that,' spokesperson Tammy Bruce told reporters. Asked about Trump's statements, Iranian foreign minister replied: 'To claim that a program has been annihilated... is a miscalculation,' adding that Tehran is 'assessing the damage' and may seek compensation. Washington has long demanded that Tehran halt all uranium enrichment – a position Iran considers a deal-breaker. Araghchi reaffirmed that the country's nuclear program remains peaceful, lawful, and under constant IAEA supervision. Iran currently enriches uranium to 60% purity, well above the 3.67% cap set under the now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal, which was rendered null and void after Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from it during his first term. 'The level of enrichment is determined by Iran's needs,' Araghchi said, adding that the current level was meant 'to demonstrate that threat and pressure are not solutions.' He also ruled out any discussion of Iran's ballistic missile program, calling it 'purely defensive and deterrent,' and said it was 'unreasonable to expect Iran to abandon its defensive capabilities' under current conditions.
