Gales

October 19, 2025

Luis Rubio

Referring to the way the United States operates, Churchill coined one of his famous phrases: “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else.” Churchill was observing the advance of the Nazi army in Europe and contemplating the risk of losing his country. A keen reader of geopolitics, he quickly understood that the only alternative for the United Kingdom—and for the world—lay across the Atlantic Ocean. However, the Americans, a democratic nation where all groups and interests express and organize themselves to advance their preferences without regard to the broader implications of their actions, were operating from an internal logic, ignoring the rest of the world and the potential consequences of what was happening on the old continent.

The past eight months have given us a glimpse into what the British Prime Minister might have felt during that complex juncture: the world has been hanging by a thread, watching President Trump dismantle, one by one, the pillars of the so-called “world order”—an order his own country had so successfully built after the end of World War II. Ignoring the benefits the U.S. economy gains from having the dollar as a reserve currency, he has undermined the very anchors that sustain it, while using pressure tactics—like tariffs and the elimination of the agency dedicated to global development assistance—to avowedly accelerate the growth of the American economy.

While it’s undeniable that the world of 1945 bears little resemblance to today’s and that, therefore, it was inevitable—and perhaps even imperative—to recalibrate various international relationships, President Trump’s actions suggest a vision that is far more tactical than strategic. For example, for decades Americans have been demanding that Europeans take responsibility for their own security—something they have only now begun to do seriously—but the abandonment of countless nations in Asia, Africa, and the Pacific has opened a remarkable window of opportunity for China to dominate much of those regions, a free gift with potentially dramatic consequences. His feud with President Lula has only improved the Brazilian president’s electoral prospects, while voters in Canada and Australia elected governments in clear reaction to Trump. The point is clear: the destruction of value has been enormous and affects all inhabitants of the globe, but the long-term consequences will most likely end up being worse for the Americans themselves.

As for Mexico, the American president’s battering has fit the second Morena administration like a glove, as it has allowed it to adopt measures that violate the bilateral relationship and the treaties that sustain it. While nominally many of the U.S. president’s initiatives directly affect Mexico, the level of integration is so deep that it is extremely difficult to derail. Much of our neighbor’s economy cannot function without Mexican labor, and both industrial and agricultural exports are essential for their daily operation and consumption. There is no doubt that the issue of migration needs formalization, as no self-respecting nation can tolerate systematic violations of its borders—but that doesn’t mean the U.S. economy can dispense with imported labor. For decades, Americans have been unable to legislate on this matter, leading to a willful blindness regarding the migration phenomenon—until a president came along willing to act without considering the implications for his own country. The point is that the same logic—reality—that led to the renegotiation of NAFTA during Trump’s first term will have to prevail in that and other areas going forward.

The picture must be completed with two key, albeit somewhat contradictory, elements. The first is that the nationalist and populist ideology that characterizes Trump is also present on the other end of the political spectrum, as illustrated by the tour of Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders at the beginning of this year. Although a broad centrist spectrum continues to reject that worldview, both parties have strongly xenophobic wings.

The other element is perhaps the most important: despite President Trump’s erosion of various institutions, the U.S. constitutional structure has proven time and again its immense strength and capacity to withstand the gales. It’s possible that James Madison, the main conceptualizer of checks and balances, had someone like the current American president in mind when he stated that since men are not angels, counterweights are needed to prevent irreparable harm. Few serious observers in the world would bet against that capacity for adaptation.

“And once the storm is over, wrote Murakami, you won’t remember how you made it through, how you managed to survive. You won’t even be sure, whether the storm is really over. But one thing is certain. When you come out of the storm, you won’t be the same person who walked in. That’s what this storm’s all about.”