In this special edition of the Hinrich Foundation’s podcast on global trade, the Association of Foreign Press Correspondents-USA sits down with Peter Draper to examine the G7’s evolution and whether it can remain relevant amid China’s rise, the growing influence of the G20, and internal divisions that are eroding the cohesion underpinning its role in global economic governance.

The Group of Seven (G7) has been at the apex of global economic governance for more than 50 years, emerging in the aftermath of the breakdown of the Bretton Woods system and the oil shocks of the 1970s to manage the economic fallout through shared approaches. Over time, it broadened into a mechanism for crisis management and coordination among advanced economies. Behind the scenes, extensive preparatory work sets the stage for informal, leader-to-leader exchanges where sensitive trade-offs can be negotiated away from public scrutiny and framed in ways that remain politically viable at home.

Today, however, the conditions that sustained this approach are shifting. The rise of China, the emergence of BRICS, and the growing weight of the Group of 20 have diluted the group’s relative influence, while domestic populist pressures — particularly in the United States — are straining its cohesion. The result is a more uncertain role for the G7 in an increasingly fragmented global order.

Tune in to this podcast as Peter Draper, Professor and Executive Director of the Institute for International Trade at the University of Adelaide, joins the Association of Foreign Press Correspondents-USA to unpack the G7’s evolution and its future in a more contested global landscape. The podcast draws on insights from The Elgar Companion to the G7, which he co-edited with Andreas Freytag and recently discussed at a Hinrich Foundation book talk.

Download Transcript

Tune into the Hinrich Foundation’s podcast series for insights on international trade.

In this special edition of the Hinrich Foundation’s podcast on global trade, the Association of Foreign Press Correspondents-USA sits down with Dawn Shackleford, President of Looking Glass Trade, LLC, to analyze the Trump administration’s pivot to Section 122 tariffs as a rapid, temporary workaround after legal setbacks, examining the credibility of its balance-of-payments justification and the roles of the IMF and WTO in assessing its implications for US trade policy.

The Trump administration’s turn to Section 122 tariffs reflects a search for speed and legal durability in advancing its trade agenda after the Supreme Court blocked the use of emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Designed as a temporary measure, Section 122 allows tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days, positioning the policy as a stopgap while more permanent tools — such as Section 232 and Section 301 — are pursued. Yet its reliance on a balance-of-payments justification raises questions about credibility, as such crises typically involve acute external imbalances and are subject to scrutiny by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) within World Trade Organization (WTO) processes.

Shackleford explains how the United States may be leveraging timing, procedural complexity, and partial product coverage to sustain the tariffs while remaining formally engaged in multilateral rules, arguing that the move underscores both the constraints of existing trade commitments and the continued relevance — and tension — of the WTO system.

Tune in to this podcast as Dawn Shackleford, President of Looking Glass Trade, LLC, and Consultant at the Hinrich Foundation, joins the Association of Foreign Press Correspondents-USA to discuss the Trump administration’s Section 122 tariffs, what they reveal about US trade policy, and the roles of the IMF and WTO. The podcast follows up on Shackleford’s recent article for the Hinrich Foundation, “Trump asserts trade payments problems. The IMF may want to sharpen its pencils.”

Download Transcript

Tune into the Hinrich Foundation’s podcast series for insights on international trade.

In an Asia Insight podcast, Doug Strub moderates a discussion with Evan Medeiros and Gerard DiPippo on Dr. Medeiros’s Asia Policy essay “A New Era of U.S.-China Interaction: From Competing to Racing.” The essay examines the U.S.-China trade war in 2025 as a possible turning point in the U.S.-China competition, arguing that the trade war created new power dynamics around a supply chain race that centers on leveraging chokepoints in critical minerals and advanced technologies.

Access the full report here.

Tune into the Hinrich Foundation’s podcast series for insights on international trade.