When U.S. President Donald Trump shook the foundations of global trade by imposing sweeping tariffs, it wasn’t merely a fleeting act of economic nationalism or an impulsive gamble. Rather, it reflected a deeply held ideological vision shaped behind the scenes by a tight-knit circle of advisors. At the core of this vision stood Stephen Ira Miran, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers and arguably the intellectual architect of Trump’s economic agenda.
In this article, we examine Miran’s ideas, his intellectual influences, and the economic logic behind the dramatic tariff policies that redefined America’s global posture—attempting to understand how personal convictions can translate into economic tremors that reshape markets and global systems alike.
A Blueprint for Rewriting Global Trade
In his recent research paper, published in November under the title “A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System,” Miran lays out a comprehensive framework for redesigning the rules of international trade. His approach to tariffs isn’t simply about generating revenue—it’s a strategic effort to revive America’s industrial capacity, which has steadily eroded in the face of rising economic powers such as China.
At the heart of Miran’s diagnosis lies what he sees as a structural imbalance in the global monetary system, rooted in the U.S. dollar’s role as the world’s primary reserve currency. While this status grants America the privilege of supplying global liquidity through trade deficits, it also inflates the value of the dollar. The result: diminished competitiveness for American exports, weakened industrial sectors, and growing socio-economic voids in America’s manufacturing heartland.
The Triffin Dilemma Revisited
To explain this paradox, Miran turns to the “Triffin Dilemma”—a long-standing economic concept highlighting the contradiction between maintaining a global currency and ensuring domestic economic stability. For the dollar to serve global markets, the U.S. must continue running trade deficits. Yet this very mechanism erodes its manufacturing base, inflates debt, and weakens organic growth. What was once considered a “privilege” of global economic leadership, Miran argues, has become an unsustainable burden.
He likens this to a uniquely American form of “Dutch disease,” where overwhelming demand for the dollar mirrors the negative impact of sudden resource windfalls—such as oil in other economies—that artificially inflate currency value and decimate industrial exports. In the U.S., this dynamic has led to a model centered on exporting financial assets while importing goods, enriching Wall Street while hollowing out industrial cities like Detroit.
Tariffs as a Strategic Lever
Trump’s controversial tariffs, therefore, were not arbitrary. They were a direct policy implementation of Miran’s ideas—designed to serve as a dual-function tool: pressuring trade rivals while revitalizing domestic revenue. More importantly, they aimed to compel large corporations to relocate their operations and investments back to American soil.
However, Miran is clear-eyed about the risks. The success of such a strategy hinges on avoiding large-scale retaliatory measures from trade partners. He views tariffs as temporary leverage to initiate renegotiations, not an end in themselves. In tandem with this approach, Miran also advocates rethinking the long-standing U.S. commitment to a “strong dollar” policy. A weaker dollar, in his view, could be a necessary measure to reinvigorate domestic industry.
Beyond Tariffs: Redesigning Economic Relations
Miran’s ambitions don’t stop at tariffs or short-term trade deals. His vision extends to a complete reengineering of America’s economic relationships—requiring trading partners to revalue their currencies, increase industrial investments in the U.S., and, in some cases, support American fiscal health by purchasing zero-yield Treasury bonds. He sees these mechanisms as essential for restoring economic balance and ensuring long-term national prosperity.
Controversy and Political Calculations
Despite the intellectual rigor of Miran’s framework, critics argue that the reality is far less calculated. Many suggest that Trump’s decisions are driven more by short-term political calculus than grand strategy—aimed at appealing to domestic voters and nationalist sentiments. Yet, regardless of the motive, the effect is the same: the global economic order is being reshaped by decisions that appear abrupt and whose outcomes remain uncertain, even for the U.S. itself.
It’s important to note that American policymaking rarely hinges on coincidence or improvisation. Behind each step lies strategic calculation—and Miran’s ideas provide the conceptual backbone of a broader vision. His work forms the ideological bridge between Trump’s populist rhetoric and the concrete policies of his administration. In many ways, it serves as the economic philosophy underpinning the “Make America Great Again” agenda—one that sees the U.S. not just as a supplier of dollars, but as a dominant force in global trade and manufacturing.
A Tipping Point?
Still, theory often collides with the messy realities of international politics, economic entanglements, and unpredictable reactions from global actors. Which leads us to a critical question: Will the Trump administration follow this path to its end—pursuing a full restructuring of the global trade and financial system? Or is the real goal simply to raise the stakes in negotiations before sitting down at the table?
