The United States, which is supposed to lead the world, is shaking it.

The global economy is now driven not by "reliance on the US" but by "caution towards the US"

In the past, the United States was a stabilizing force for the global economy, supporting demand and calming markets even if somewhat roughly. However, by the spring of 2026, this premise has been significantly shaken. The world is no longer looking at the US as a leader. Instead, it sees a highly contradictory superpower that disrupts rules with tariffs, expands geopolitical risks, and yet has its dollar purchased as a safe asset.

The emblem of this contradiction is the tariff policy. In February 2026, the US Supreme Court ruled the comprehensive tariffs implemented by the Trump administration under national emergency powers as illegal. However, the administration immediately shifted to another legal basis, initially proposing a uniform 10% increase, followed by a plan to raise it to 15%. In other words, even if the framework changed, the pressure on the world continued. The OECD also notes that the US introduced new uniform tariffs following the Supreme Court's decision.

Moreover, this tariff offensive has not neatly achieved the "correction of external deficits" as the administration claimed. According to a Reuters investigation, the US goods trade deficit reached a record high of $1.23 trillion in 2025. While the deficit with China decreased, deficits with countries like Mexico, Vietnam, Taiwan, Thailand, and India grew, indicating a shift in import sources rather than a reduction. The IMF also points out that tariffs are not a shortcut to correcting current account imbalances and tend to suppress production in various regions.

This is not surprising when considering the economic mechanisms. The US deficit is not determined solely by "unfair trade" but is deeply linked to domestic factors such as fiscal deficits, consumption strength, savings shortages, and investment structures. In its April analysis, the IMF stated that sustainable rebalancing requires adjustments in domestic policies across countries and that tariffs and narrowly defined industrial policies do not provide fundamental solutions. Thus, the instability in the global economy is not only due to the US's hardline foreign stance but also its approach of trying to solve domestic distortions by projecting them outward.

Adding to this is the energy insecurity stemming from the Middle East situation. The IMF, WTO, and OECD all cite supply disruptions and rising oil prices originating from the Middle East as major downside risks in their 2026 global economic outlooks. The WTO suggests that if shipments from the Persian Gulf, which accounted for about 20% of global liquid petroleum consumption in 2024, are severely restricted, the growth in global goods trade volume could slow from the expected 1.9% this year to 1.4%. The security tensions, in which the US is a direct party, are clearly impacting global energy prices, transportation, tourism, and inflation.

What makes this situation even more troublesome is that while the US is the epicenter of instability, it is also a "safe haven." After the collapse of US-Iran talks, Reuters reported that the dollar was once again bought as a safe asset. Surveys among central bank officials indicate that while geopolitics is seen as the greatest risk, the dollar is still regarded as the most important safe-haven currency. The world flees to the currency of the country causing the shock. As long as this contradiction exists, the US can externalize a significant portion of its chaos costs, intensifying dissatisfaction among other countries.

Reactions on social media reflect this mix of dissatisfaction and resignation. On X, messages such as "Tariffs and industrial policies are not shortcuts to rebalancing" and "Sustainable adjustments start with domestic policies" were widely shared in response to IMF-related posts. Economic accounts also spread posts with the theme "Tariffs lead to the weakening of the global economy." Rather than emotional criticism of the US, there is a notable perception that US policies are reducing the growth potential of the entire world.

On Reddit's economic forums, more candid words are expressed. In threads discussing the Supreme Court's ruling of illegality, voices were raised about the "enormous damage to international trade relations over the past year," and in discussions about the 15% tariff increase, reactions such as "Countries are starting to sign long-term contracts excluding the US" and "No longer seen as a stable trading partner" were observed. In another thread, the point that tariffs, even if they do not immediately crash the economy, harm small businesses, pass costs onto consumers, and weaken the economic foundation, garnered support.

However, there is also a contrary perspective on social media. A calm view is that the Supreme Court rejected "the legal basis for those tariffs," not the president's tariff authority itself. Indeed, as reported by Reuters and AP, the administration still has alternative routes like Section 122, Section 301, and Section 232. Therefore, the uncertainty of US policy lies not in "whether it will be stopped by the courts," but in "whether it might be revived in another form even if stopped." What truly weighs on the world is this unpredictability itself.

So, how will the world respond? One way is the diversification of procurement and export destinations. The WTO already points out that the Asian economic zone is redirecting supplies to growing markets like South America and Africa due to reduced market access to North America. Another is that countries will hasten to establish "economic structures less susceptible to US domestic politics." In energy, supply chains, defense, and currency, there is a high possibility of moving towards reducing dependence, even at higher costs than before. The anxiety pushed outward by the US may ultimately encourage the world to reduce its dependence on the US.

The sense conveyed by the original article's title, "The US is dragging the world into turbulent waters," is not an exaggeration. The issue is not that the US is weakening, but that it remains strong while becoming unstable. It sits at the center of demand, finance, markets, currency, and security, yet from this center, the rules are being shaken. This is the real fear of the global economy in 2026. In a stormy sea, the most dangerous thing is not the height of the waves, but the unpredictability of where the next wave will come from.

List of Source URLs

Sydney Morning Herald
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/the-us-is-dragging-the-rest-of-the-world-into-turbulent-economic-waters-20260413-p5zncj.html

Reuters confirmed the US Supreme Court's rejection of Trump's comprehensive tariffs
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-rejects-trumps-global-tariffs-2026-02-20/

Reuters confirmed the US's introduction of a new uniform 10% tariff and the subsequent plan to raise it to 15% after the Supreme Court's decision
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/trump-orders-temporary-10-global-tariff-replace-duties-struck-down-by-us-supreme-2026-02-20/
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/new-global-us-15-tariff-rate-expected-kick-this-week-treasury-secretary-bessent-2026-03-04/

OECD's March 2026 interim outlook. Organizing the impact of the US's new uniform tariffs on the global economy
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-economic-outlook-interim-report-march-2026_d4623013-en/full-report/component-2.html

WTO's March 2026 outlook. Confirming the potential downward pressure on global trade outlook due to Middle East tensions and rising oil prices
https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/gtos0326_e.pdf

IMF analysis. The rationale for the argument that tariffs are not a shortcut to correcting external imbalances and that domestic policy is important
https://www.imf.org/en/blogs/articles/2026/04/06/global-imbalances-old-questions-new-answers
https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2026/04/04/global-imbalances-industrial-policy-and-tariffs-575229

Reuters Graphics confirmed the effects of tariffs, the US goods trade deficit in 2025, the shift from China to other countries, and the increase in tariff revenue
https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-TRUMP/TARIFF-ANNIVERSARY/myvmybzwbvr/

Reuters confirmed the strengthening of the dollar and risk aversion due to the worsening Middle East situation
https://www.reuters.com/business/global-markets-dollar-urgent-2026-04-12/
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/global-markets-wrapup-1-2026-04-12/

Reuters reported on the impact of war and energy shocks on global growth and prices ahead of the IMF and World Bank meetings
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/economic-shock-middle-east-war-cast-shadow-over-imf-world-bank-meetings-2026-04-12/
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/war-middle-east-will-lead-slower-growth-higher-inflation-imf-chief-tells-reuters-2026-04-06/

Reuters shows that geopolitical risk is the biggest concern among central bank officials
https://www.reuters.com/business/central-banks-concern-over-rising-geopolitical-tensions-surges-survey-shows-2026-04-07/

Confirmed public X/Reddit pages as sources for SNS reactions
https://x.com/KGeorgieva/with_replies
https://x.com/pogourinchas
https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1r9xxzo/supreme_court_strikes_down_trumps_global_tariffs/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1rav9d4/trump_to_lift_global_tariffs_to_15_from_10/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1pyteuf/why_havent_trumps_tariffs_crashed_the_us_economy/