If U.S. allies in Europe, along with Canada, recognize Palestine instead of supporting the two-state solution that has been on the table since the conflict began in 1967, the U.S. could find itself isolated. But the question remains: will recognition by France, the UK, and Canada actually stop the Israeli bombard-ment and lift the food blockade? Could this be an emotional, knee-jerk decision rather than a strategically calculated move? In response to Medvedev’s perceived threat, President Trump has ordered U.S. nuclear submarines into strategic positions, further heightening global tensions. Realizing that Trump may be serious about his threat to im-pose more sanctions and punish the nations that breach the sanctions, Russian President Vladmir Putin has now agreed to a meeting with President Trump in Alaska next Friday, 15th August. India that is accused of buying Russian oil in breach of sanctions, has been hit with a steep tariff by the Trump administration. Similarly, a higher tariff has been imposed on Canada for its plan to recognize Palestine. Clearly, Trump is leveraging economic se-curity to strengthen national security—penal-izing India for buying Russian oil and Canada for aligning with France and the UK as well as Australia on Palestinian recognition. The UK, however, has been spared harsher measures, benefiting from a baseline tariff of only 10%, reportedly due to the positive influence of King Charles during Trump’s recent visit to his golf courses in Ireland. France, by contrast, faces a significantly higher tariff than the UK. Tariffs have also been increased to 40% for about 30 countries deemed to have made in-sufficient efforts to negotiate new trade terms with the U.S. The shifting of the 90-day tariff pause deadline from July 9 to August 1—al-lowing more time for compliance—along with Trump’s discretionary tariff use, reinforces that America First does not mean America Alone. As U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent ex-plained, America First means the U.S. is ready to trade with the rest of the world—but only on the basis of new tariff rates the U.S. deems fair, in reciprocity to what American goods and services face abroad. Historically, the U.S. vol-untarily accepted less favorable trade terms as part of its “big brother” role in global affairs. Under Trump, this “do-good” approach is be-ing replaced with reciprocal tariffs—disrupt-ing the established trade order and, potentially, reshaping the global order entirely. The U.S. is not alone in facing unfair trade. Africa has long been stunted by inequitable trade practices imposed by its former colo-nizers since the Berlin Conference of 1884–85, where the continent was partitioned without African leaders at the table. Since the 15th cen-tury—through slavery, colonialism, imperial-ism, neo-colonialism, and now debt traps—Af-rica has been exploited. Unfair trade remains the latest manifestation of this exploitation. This is a yoke the continent must break, and Trump’s effort to restructure the 80-year-old global trade order via sweeping tariffs pres-ents a rare opportunity for Africa to negotiate better terms. Africa’s leaders should leverage Trump’s justification for reciprocal tariffs to demand fairer trade arrangements, which would address one of the root causes of the continent’s extreme poverty. For too long, Africa has been treated as a source of unprocessed raw materials and a dumping ground for finished products. The continent’s leaders must embrace global trade reforms rather than remain passive, lest they become complicit in its continued underde-velopment. U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders recently re-marked that “status quo politics is no longer tenable” in America. While speaking about U.S. domestic politics, this sentiment can be applied globally. Trump’s disruption of the old world order—particularly in trade and tariffs—aligns with Sanders’ progressive worldview. If equity and justice are still central to de-mocracy, it is time to give Africa a fair chance by intentionally reviewing global trade with the continent. As traditional U.S. partners struggle to meet its new expectations, Africa could fill the gap. The continent’s current in-frastructure deficits—one of the main deter-rents to manufacturing investment—could be addressed through U.S. cooperation, much like China’s transformation into the world’s manufacturing hub following U.S. diplomatic engagement in the 1970s. Trump’s initial 145% tariff hike on China was indeed a shock to the global system. But af-ter high-level negotiations, rates were reduced to more sustainable levels—yet another exam-ple that America First does not mean America Alone. Trump, a master negotiator, used the high tariff as a starting point, anticipating that nations would resist at first but ultimately en-gage in talks, hence the offer of a 90-day pause. The U.S. had also threatened to impose a 50% tariff on the EU from June 1, after pausing earlier retaliatory rates. When the EU sought a resolution, the deadline was moved to July 9, which has now expired. With little progress in negotiations and accusations that the EU is being overly rigid, the U.S. had reinstated the 50% tariff which it later withdrew. Europe’s tough bargaining is unsurpris-ing. The EU had previously retaliated against the U.S. tariffs announced in April but pulled back at the last moment, leaving China iso-lated in the trade conflict. China, the world’s second-largest economy, eventually negotiated a reprieve in Geneva, easing tensions with the U.S. The EU narrowly avoided a similar con-frontation by securing a pause. To prevent the activation of Trump’s new tariff threat to Europe, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has assured, “Europe is ready to advance talks swiftly and decisively.” She recently added that Europe is working toward meeting the new August 1 deadline and she actually met the deadline. The rapprochement is unsurprising be-cause the volume of trade between the US and the EU is currently about $606 billion. That is much larger than the combined value of US trade with its northern neighbors—Mexico and Canada—and even bigger than the com-bined trade between the US, China, and Japan. So far, nine countries have signed agree-ments already. The UK was granted only a 10% tariff rate—seen as a gesture of deference by President Trump to the King of England— while Brazil was hit with a 50% tariff, South Korea with 15%, and India with 25%, the latter also sanctioned with additional 25% for buying oil from Russia despite global sanctions related to its ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Ahead of the deadline, Europe, South Ko-rea, India, and a few other nations negotiated new tariff rates with the US, which have risen from a flat 10% to between 15% and 50%. In fact, Trump’s tariffs have raised rates to their highest levels since the Great Depression. And all things being equal the huge deficit current-ly weighing the economy down may be on a balancing trajectory. Critics initially believed he would fail in this tariff war, fearing it would negatively im-pact the US economy and the rest of the world would ignore him. Yet, despite the trade battles, US GDP rose to 3%. Skeptics, however, argue that manufacturers and retailers have been holding off on passing costs to consumers, which is why Americans have yet to feel the pain. That fear remains an imagination as the US economy is not showing signs of going into a recession as projected. In what seems like desperate efforts to se-cure favorable trade terms, presidents of some nations that he has slammed reciprocal tariffs are running helter skelter and others are rush-ing off to Washington, uninvited to the White House trying to curry Trump’s favor. One thing is certain: Trump has profoundly reshaped the global trade landscape, wielding economic policy as a tool of national security. He has even threatened higher tariffs on Cana-da for its plans to recognize Palestine—follow-ing the example of France, the UK, Canada, and most recently, Australia. Clearly, the whole world is now metaphor-ically dancing to the tune being dictated by President Trump leveraging economic secu-rity to achieve global security. Undeniably, Trump is turning out to be one of the world’s greatest reformers. Irrespective of the fact that his reforms were initially derid-ed and rejected by Americans and indeed crit-ics across the world who felt that his reforms were capable of disrupting the old world order and would spell doom for humankind. As things currently stand, if Trump ends the Russia-Ukraine war and brings peace to the Middle East by resolving the Israeli-Hamas horrific bloodshed leveraging his unconven-tional method of using economic security to achieve global security, as Christina Aguilera, a US song writer, noted: “The roughest road often leads to the top.” What the statement above suggests is that meaningful reform often requires difficult choices and hard work but ultimately leads to a more prosperous and resilient nation. According to Kofi Annan, former UN Sec-retary General, “Reform is a process, and not an event.” That wise admonition underscores the idea that reform is an ongoing process that requires effort and dedication, rather than a single event or decision.” Furthermore, the perspective offered by Catherine the Great, empress of Russia from 1762-1796, known for her impressive reign and cultural achievements: “It is better to inspire a reform than to enforce it,” is quite instructive in the current circumstances. It suggests that inspiring reform can be more effective than forcing it, highlighting the importance of lead-ership and vision in driving positive change. Circling back to Nigeria, and drawing a parallel between reformist President Trump of the US and President Bola Tinubu who has engaged in reforms since he took office on May 29, 2023, is a little over two years ago, reformers always face resistance, humans often fear the unknown and are always happy to remain in their comfort zones. Hence, it is unsurprising that Tinubu’s re-forms were greeted with cynicism by some Nigerians weary of a period of failed govern-ment promises of a better life by previous ad-ministrations. Ending over four decades long fuel and sub-sidy, boosting the foreign exchange reserve in the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, from $34 billion in 2023 to $40 billion this year and in-creasing the funds going to the states for the development of the rural areas by governors sometimes as much as threefold, and the boost in non-oil exports by as much as $3.225 billion are some positive outcomes of Tinubu’s re-forms. All of these have resulted in the stabi-lization of the naira enhanced by the boost in crude oil production which has climbed from a low of roughly 1.3 million barrels per day in 2023 to about 1.8 million this year not forgetting the stability of the naira which cures business uncertainty. But, as encouraging as these outlined devel-opments are, due to skepticism arising from the hardship associated with the reforms, Tinubu is not being given the flowers that he should have been receiving. The question is: By the time he completes his reforms and term in office, would President Donald J Trump be the new President George Washington of America in terms of positive and consequential impact? And would President Bola Tinubu leave a type of positive legacy in the manner that Nel-son Mandela left huge positive imprints in the sands of time in South Africa? Given the rainbow forming on the horizon in the US, the world, and Nigeria through the reform efforts of Trump regarding the US and the world through sweeping trade tariff chang-es, and Tinubu in Nigeria who has ended en-trenched obnoxious policies respectfully, one cannot help but be optimistic about a better lease of life awaiting the world, Americans and Nigerians. • Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, and alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, is a Common-wealth Institute scholar and a former commis-sioner in the Delta State government. He sent this piece from Lagos.