Maq Masi Blog

Every war, whether fought with bullets or tariffs, springs from a single, primal fear: economic decline. Strip away the rhetoric of ideology, religion, or sovereignty, and you find nations acting not out of strength but out of dread—a gnawing anxiety that their economic future is slipping away. From Hitler’s Germany to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, from Brexit’s economic rebellion to Donald Trump’s 2025 tariffs, the pattern is unmistakable. Leaders gamble that conflict, in one form or another, will arrest decline and secure their nation’s place in an unforgiving global economy. Yet the outcome hinges not on the aggressor’s bravado but on the defender’s resilience and on alliances—alliances that are never free, always tied to economic gain. In the end, there is no universal morality, only the victor’s narrative. The true spoils are economic, reshaping the world long after the dust has settled.

History shows the same pattern. In the 1930s, Germany’s economy was suffocating under Versailles reparations and mass unemployment—30% by 1932. Hitler’s wars were not simply ideological; they were a desperate bid for resources and autarky. Fast-forward to Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine: beneath the geopolitics lay fear of losing energy markets that made up almost half of its GDP. Even Brexit, a bloodless war, was driven by Britain’s fear of dilution within the EU, with promises that leaving would release billions for trade autonomy, though the reality has been weaker growth and a shrinking export share.

Now, in 2025, Donald Trump’s second-term tariffs epitomise this same fear. Labelled “Liberation Day” tariffs, they imposed a 10% baseline on all imports, rising to 20% on EU goods, 34% on Chinese products, and up to 46% on selected nations, with threats of 100% secondary tariffs against countries trading with Russia. These measures target more than £1.8 trillion of imports, designed to generate hundreds of billions to offset deficits and reshore industry. The fear is clear: a £780 billion U.S. trade deficit in 2024, and growing anxiety that American industrial dominance is slipping. But the price is high—households face thousands in extra costs, GDP is projected to contract, and retaliatory measures from China, Canada and the EU threaten global growth. This is war in economic dress, driven by the same logic as tanks on a battlefield: better to fight now than slide quietly into decline.

Alliances, too, are contracts, not gifts. NATO aid to Ukraine secures lucrative defence and reconstruction markets. China’s and India’s purchase of discounted Russian oil is not loyalty but necessity, fuelling their economies at 30% below market prices. Even corporate deals reflect the pattern: Nvidia’s export rights tied to revenue-sharing with Washington act as a tariff by proxy. Each so-called partnership is a calculated trade, an economic lifeline wrapped in political language.

Indicators of Fear Before Conflict

Conflict	Fear Signal	Details
Germany (1930s)	Collapse at home	Hyperinflation in 1923; unemployment at 30% by 1932.
Russia (pre-2022)	Fortress reserves	Built £460bn reserves after 2014, cut imports by 20%.
U.S. (2025)	Trade deficit panic	£780bn deficit; tariffs on 71% of imports.

Morality in war is a myth. It is always post-written by the winners. What endures are the economic realities. Russia may hold territory, but sanctions choke its long-term growth. Brexit promised sovereignty, but left Britain with weaker trade. Trump’s tariffs may bring short-term jobs, but at the risk of lost real incomes and ruptured global supply chains. Sudan’s conflicts over gold and oil, like India and Pakistan’s water disputes, show the same root.

Wars, whether waged with missiles or tariffs, are always acts of fear—fear that without conflict, decline is inevitable. Power is only the mask. It is fear, not power, that drives conflict. And in every case, the spoils, if any, are measured in economic terms.

---