In the shadow of President Donald Trump’s escalating tariff war, the European Union is charting a bold course to diversify its economic partnerships, with signs of a surprising thaw in trade relations with China.

As transatlantic ties strained under the weight of U.S. protectionism, the EU is reportedly exploring lifting its tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs), a move that could pave the way for deeper business agreements and reshape global trade dynamics. This strategic pivot, driven by necessity and opportunity, underscores a broader push among U.S. allies to seek new markets amid fears that Trump’s policies have fractured long-standing alliances.

The catalyst for this shift is Trump’s aggressive trade agenda, which has hit the EU with a 20% “reciprocal” tariff on €380 billion ($432 billion) of its exports, temporarily delayed for 90 days but still looming. Additional levies include a 25% tariff on EU steel and aluminum and a 25% duty on cars and auto parts, with threats of further tariffs on lumber, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals. These measures, part of Trump’s “America First” doctrine, have jolted the EU, which exported €532 billion in goods to the U.S. last year, making it the bloc’s largest market.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, speaking in Brussels on Thursday, called the tariffs “a major blow to the world economy,” warning of spiraling uncertainty and rising protectionism.

Faced with this economic siege, the EU is accelerating efforts to diversify its trade network, a strategy von der Leyen framed as engaging with “countries that account for 87% of global trade and share our commitment to a free and open exchange.” The bloc, already boasting the world’s largest trade agreement network with 75 partners covering €2 trillion in trade, is now doubling down.

Recent months have seen renewed momentum in talks with the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and India, while a landmark political agreement with the Mercosur bloc—Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay—was reached in December, promising a market of 780 million consumers. Even post-Brexit talks with the UK are gaining traction, signaling a broad push to secure new markets.

But the most intriguing development is the EU’s warming stance toward China, particularly in the electric vehicle sector. Last year, the EU imposed tariffs of up to 35.3% on Chinese EVs, citing unfair state subsidies that threatened European automakers. Now, in a striking reversal, Brussels and Beijing are negotiating to replace these tariffs with minimum price commitments, a step that could ease tensions and open doors to broader cooperation.

China’s Commerce Ministry confirmed on Thursday that talks with EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic have restarted, focusing on EVs and industrial collaboration.

“We’re seeing a pragmatic shift,” said an EU official, speaking anonymously due to the sensitivity of the negotiations. “Lifting EV tariffs could be a goodwill gesture to unlock bigger deals.”

This pivot comes as Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods, now at a staggering 145%, risk diverting low-cost Chinese products to Europe, a concern von der Leyen raised in a call with Chinese Premier Li Qiang this week. The EU is exploring mechanisms to monitor such diversions, but the prospect of deeper ties with China is gaining traction.

Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, fresh from a Beijing visit on Friday, called for a “balanced relationship,” while Hungary and others advocate closer engagement. However, skepticism persists, with French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou warning against over-reliance on China, which he accused of aiming to “replace all European producers in agriculture and industry.”

The EU’s flirtation with China is not without risks. Chinese EVs, led by brands like BYD and Nio, already hold 25% of the European market, and easing tariffs could intensify pressure on Germany’s struggling auto sector, which supports 14 million jobs.

“We’re walking a tightrope,” said Sigrid de Vries, head of the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association. “We need new partners, but not at the cost of our industries.”

Analysts also caution that Trump’s tariffs could exacerbate existing EU-China trade imbalances, with fears of Beijing dumping excess goods in Europe.

Beyond China, the EU is eyeing broader horizons. Von der Leyen announced on Thursday plans to explore cooperation with the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade bloc spanning Australia to Canada, which Trump abandoned in 2017. New Zealand’s Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has proposed using it as a foundation for a rules-based trading pact with the EU, a move that could anchor the bloc in Asia’s dynamic markets.

Currently, the EU remains open to salvaging transatlantic trade. Sefcovic heads to Washington on Monday to push for tariff reductions, armed with offers like zero-tariff deals for cars and industrial goods. But with Trump’s administration showing little appetite for compromise, Sefcovic described recent talks as “frank” but fruitless, hope is fading.

“We’re ready to negotiate, but we’re not naive,” von der Leyen said, hinting at retaliatory tariffs worth €26 billion on U.S. goods, from bourbon to motorcycles, set for mid-April if talks fail.

As Trump’s tariffs redraw the global trade map, the EU’s pivot reflects a broader trend among U.S. allies. Canada, hit with steel and aluminum duties, is matching them “dollar for dollar,” while Malaysia opts for dialogue over retaliation. Japan and South Korea, wary of losing U.S. market access, are cautiously seeking exemptions. However, the EU’s moves signal a deeper reckoning: a world where allies, once tethered to Washington, are forging their own paths.

In a country teeming with youth and innovation, where nearly every street corner tells a story of ambition waiting to bloom, Akinwumi Adesina, President of the African Development Bank (AfDB), has offered a blunt verdict on the financial system that governs it: it was never meant for the youth.

Speaking on Channels Television on Thursday, Adesina, a former Nigerian Minister of Agriculture and one of Africa’s foremost economists, did not mince words. He accused commercial banks in Nigeria and across the continent of systematically shutting the doors on the very generation that carries Africa’s future in its hands.

A System Built for the Old, By the Old

Adesina’s critique goes beyond surface-level complaints about difficult loan procedures. He paints a picture of a banking system whose architecture is fundamentally rigged against young people—one that treats youthful ambition as a liability rather than an asset.

“You walk into the bank, and you see young people, 21 years old, coming in. In your risk assessment, the only thing you see is risk, risk, risk,” Adesina said. “And so you go ask them for securities that they need to bring to you—‘do you have a house, do you have a land, do you have tax for the last 40 years?’ But they’re only 21 years old.”

For most young Nigerians, these demands aren’t just steep—they’re impossible. Many are just emerging from university, hustling through the country’s ballooning unemployment and underemployment crisis, trying to turn coding skills, fashion design, or agritech ideas into tangible enterprises. But when they turn to banks, they are told to return with what they don’t have – collateral.

465 Million Youths, One Broken System

Adesina’s frustration stems from the sheer scale of the problem. Africa is home to more than 465 million young people between the ages of 15 and 35. In Nigeria alone, youth account for over 60 percent of the population. And yet, the financial sector across much of the continent continues to operate on outdated risk models and rigid credit structures that ignore the continent’s evolving demographic realities.

“The commercial banking system, the financial system, has failed young people in Africa,” he said, putting the matter plainly.

It shows every day in the statistics of failed startups, in the stories of dreams deferred, and most visibly in the growing wave of youth emigration, now widely known in Nigeria as the “japa syndrome.” For Adesina, the brain drain isn’t just a tragic consequence of bad governance, it’s a reflection of a system that refuses to back its youth.

No More Freebies. Fund Ideas, Not Slogans

One of the more striking elements of Adesina’s comments was his rejection of tokenistic government and NGO-run youth programs that often dominate headlines but deliver little in actual support.

“First and foremost, is to recognize that young people don’t need freebies,” he said. “We don’t need people just saying, ‘Oh well, I just want to give you a youth empowerment program.’ What does that mean?”

According to Adesina, the real solution lies in access to capital, and not as a handout, but as a real investment. He urged banks to abandon the conservative thinking that sees youth as high-risk by default and to embrace bold, strategic investments in their ventures.

“They need capital. They need you to put your money at risk on their behalf,” he said, calling for a rethink of risk assessment models that currently penalize innovation.

Why This Matters Now

Adesina’s remarks come at a time when Nigeria is struggling to curb rising unemployment, with youth joblessness hovering around 53 percent, according to estimates from local economists. The country’s micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) are considered its economic backbone, yet many of them operate informally or remain stunted due to a lack of financing.

The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has, in the past, rolled out credit schemes targeting youth and SMEs. However, many such programs have faced implementation bottlenecks, corruption allegations, or have been mired in political patronage.

Adesina’s comments suggest that unless commercial banks, not just central authorities, step up to back the next generation, the country risks losing both its workforce and its entrepreneurial spark.

The AfDB President’s message is as much a challenge as it is a condemnation. For Nigerian banks that post billions in profit annually while offering little to the country’s young, he is calling for a shift not just in policy, but in mindset.

“Rethink your risk models,” he said. “Invest in the future. Our people are our greatest asset.”

Adesina’s words come as more young Nigerians weigh the option of fleeing to countries with friendlier climates for talent and capital. His call is expected to stimulate action, not just the banks, but an entire ecosystem that seems unwilling to bet on the very people who could transform it.

In a striking moment at Thursday’s Cabinet meeting, President Donald Trump hinted that his high-profile partnership with Elon Musk may soon come to an end, raising questions about the future of one of Washington’s most watched alliances.

Trump’s remarks, delivered with Musk seated nearby, underscored a relationship strained by policy disagreements and the mounting costs of Musk’s role as a vocal supporter, particularly as his leadership at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) sparks chaos and backlash that threatens his business empire.

Trump’s statement came during a discussion at the White House, where he praised Musk’s contributions but pointedly distanced himself.

“Elon has done a fantastic job. Look, he’s sitting here, and I don’t care. I don’t need Elon for anything other than I happen to like him,” Trump told reporters.

The comment, laced with casual dismissal, suggests a deliberate pivot from a partnership that has defined much of Trump’s second term. Sources close to the administration point to Musk’s temporary status as a special government employee, limited by federal law to 130 days of service in a year, as a key factor. Trump himself fueled speculation last week, stating on April 3 that Musk would likely leave “in a few months,” a timeline echoed by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt in an X post on April 2, which confirmed Musk’s exit once his DOGE work concludes.

Musk’s tenure at DOGE has been nothing short of seismic. Tasked with slashing government spending, he announced plans to cut $150 billion for the 2026 fiscal year, laying off thousands of federal workers and shuttering foreign aid programs. These moves, aimed at streamlining bureaucracy, have instead unleashed turmoil across agencies, with critics decrying the rapid pace and human toll.

The fallout has spilled beyond government corridors, hitting Musk’s personal and corporate interests hard. Tesla, his flagship company, has become a lightning rod for public anger, with showrooms targeted by protests and owners reporting vandalized or burned vehicles. During a Tesla all-hands meeting last month, Musk lamented the apocalyptic media coverage, saying, “I can’t walk past the TV without seeing a Tesla on fire,” and urged detractors to criticize without destroying his products.

Musk’s unwavering support for Trump has come at a steep price. His $277 million in contributions to Trump and GOP candidates in the 2024 elections cemented his role as a political powerhouse, while public appearances—like last month’s White House event where Trump test-drove a red Tesla Model S—cast him as a loyal ally. Trump recounted the purchase on Thursday, framing it as a “show of support” for Musk, though he emphasized paying full price.

“They said, ‘Oh, did you get a bargain?’ No. I said, ‘Give me the top price,’” he said.

However, this loyalty has cost Musk dearly. Tesla’s brand is under siege, its reputation tangled in the controversy surrounding DOGE’s cuts, and Musk’s personal fortune faces pressure as investors question his divided focus.

Adding to the strain is a growing policy rift, most notably over trade. Musk, a vocal advocate for open markets, has pushed for zero-tariff economic ties, recently calling for a “free trade zone” between the US and Europe during a meeting with Italy’s League Party on April 5. This stance clashes with Trump’s recent announcement of sweeping tariffs on over 180 countries, a protectionist move that could disrupt Tesla’s global supply chain and raise costs for consumers.

Musk’s frustration surfaced in a sharp critique of Trump’s top advisor, Peter Navarro, whom he called “dumber than a sack of bricks” after Navarro referred to him as a “car assembler.” The exchange highlights a broader divide: Musk’s globalist vision versus Trump’s America-first agenda, a tension that may hasten their parting.

Despite the cracks, some in Trump’s circle see a future for Musk beyond DOGE. Vice President JD Vance told Fox News last week that Musk could remain an advisor after his formal role ends, though details remain unclear. For now, Musk’s smile and nod during Trump’s Cabinet meeting remarks belied the uncertainty ahead. As he navigates the fallout from DOGE and Tesla’s challenges, Musk faces a pivotal moment: step back from the political fray to salvage his businesses or double down on a waning alliance.

The Trump-Musk saga, once a symbol of bold collaboration, now teeters on the edge of separation. With tariffs looming and DOGE’s disruptions reverberating, the question isn’t just when Musk will leave, but whether their shared vision can endure the fallout.