Evaluating how to respond

It seems like the user wants articles formatted with headlines and section headings, without additional commentary or paraphrasing. When I answer, I’ve been summarizing with structured headings, but I’ve been rewriting some sentences and not keeping things verbatim. Since they didn’t object to earlier responses and simply provided more articles, it’s likely they want the same format: headlines and sections, but keeping the original text without changes.

Structuring commentary with headings

The user requested that I keep paragraphs unchanged, only adding headings in the right spots like H1 for the main title and H2 for sub-headings. I’ll maintain the original text verbatim and avoid paraphrasing or changing sentences, while inserting headings where appropriate. For this article, I’ll format it like this:

H1: Mindless Tariffs: Trump’s Pause Masks Disaster

H2: Celebrating Failure
H2: Misreading China
… and so on for each logical section.

I’ll make sure all content stays true to its original structure, just adding the required headings.

Formatting commentary with sections

This piece provides commentary on Trump’s tariff decisions and involves several key points that need section headings. I’ll break down the content into logical sub-sections:

H1: Tariff Troubles: A Closer Look at Trump’s Strategy

H2: Misunderstanding China and Its Response
H2: The Delusion of Success
H2: Key Figures in Trump’s Circle
H2: Support and Criticism from Congress

I’ll keep each paragraph verbatim but insert the headings at logical points to enhance the structure, maintaining the original meaning and flow.

Thought for 35 seconds

Mindless Tariffs

By Mel Gurtov

Celebrating What Shouldn’t Be Celebrated

It takes a certain kind of person who celebrates when something occurs that she had predicted would not happen. Likewise, it takes a certain kind of person who pretends that a dramatic failure actually was a triumph. 

Both these types have emerged with Donald Trump’s 90‑day pause in his tariff war, after the stock market had lost several trillion dollars in value. They belong to the same fantasy world in which election defeats are fraudulent, legitimate lawsuits are witch hunts, judges who rule against them are crazy Marxists, and foreign students who protest are terrorists and must be deported.

Ignoring the Looming Catastrophe

In Trumpworld, the decision to pause the worldwide tariffs was not for the obvious reason that it was a looming catastrophe—one that was propelling the US economy toward a recession, forcing US allies and friends in other major economies to plan retaliation, and causing anguish among billionaires and even some in Trump’s inner circle. No, the decision, he insisted, was in deference to the needless anxieties of some people around him.

So he generously decided to give everyone except the Chinese a breather. Far be it from The Donald to admit that he doesn’t understand tariffs and that he’s worried about polls that show how exceptionally unpopular are his tariffs and for that matter his entire economic policy.

Misreading China

Most especially, Trump and his aides don’t understand the Chinese. For reasons that go back to China’s 19th‑century history with the West, Chinese leaders don’t react well to perceived bullying. They showed this the first time around with Trump’s tariff war, and now again: They will retaliate, not buckle, to US pressure. 

Trump said on Truth Social, April 4: “China played it wrong, they panicked—the one thing they cannot afford to do.” To the contrary, there is every sign that China will not only match every Trump tariff with its own. China will use the trade war as an opportunity. It will deepen economic involvement in the Global South (the developing countries), expand self‑reliance in goods it typically imports, give greater attention to increasing household consumption, and draw an even tighter link between economic and national security.

No Guardrails

Self‑delusion is required to make Trump’s tariff war look like a win. Trump is surrounded by delusional people. 

Loyalists and Self‑Delusion

One is Steven Miller, the deputy chief of staff, who said: “President Trump’s master strategy, bold statesmanship and brilliant tactical planning has done more to reform broken international trade in days than anyone has achieved in decades while economically and politically isolating the global architect of economic aggression: China” (Washington Post, April 9). That’s the kind of laudatory language we can read any day in the People’s Daily extolling Xi Jinping. 

Another of Trump’s supreme loyalists is Peter Navarro, the architect of the tariff war who served time in jail for his loyalty to Trump. Elon Musk calls Navarro a “moron” and his Harvard education a “bad thing” for advocating what amounts to a tax on American consumers. 

But Navarro, drawing upon his longstanding hostility toward China, has been unrelenting. It was Navarro who authored the trade section of the Project 2025 handbook, in which he advocated a complete economic decoupling of the US from China. Looks like he’s succeeding, which makes him believe not just that he’s done the right thing, but that the tariff war has gone precisely as planned. 

How about House Speaker Mike Johnson? “Behold the ‘Art of the Deal,’” Johnson said in a statement lauding the president’s strategy. “President Trump has created leverage, brought many countries to the table and will deliver for American workers, American manufacturers and America’s future!” Never mind looming inflation, or (as the Times has reported) the decision of many multinational corporations based in China to stay there rather than return home or go to a third country. 

Congressional Complicity

As usual, the great majority of Republicans in Congress refuse to criticize Trump. Many wince at the tariffs, and some (like Ted Cruz) actually call it a tax on consumers—but then go on to wish Trump well. 

Only about a half dozen Republicans back proposed legislation in the Senate (the Grassley‑Cantwell bill) that would “require the president to give Congress 48 hours’ notice of any new tariffs and require House and Senate approval within 60 days or they would automatically be canceled.” The bill doesn’t have a ghost of a chance of making it to Trump’s desk—where he would veto it anyway. 

Empty Boasts

Finally, there’s Trump himself, trying to show supreme confidence. On April 10 he claimed his administration was “doing really well on our TARIFF POLICY.” But neither he nor any of his cabinet members have been able to cite a single instance, other than Vietnam, of talks underway with foreign leaders or trade deals nearing completion. 

Fact is, there aren’t any. No matter, Trump says they’ll all come running to kiss his behind. No one around him dares say otherwise.