Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Shocked, But Not Surprised: US Flexes Mafia Muscle to Derail Global Shipping's Green Deal

Blog

Shocked, But Not Surprised: US Flexes Mafia Muscle to Derail Global Shipping's Green Deal
Blog

Blog

Shocked, But Not Surprised: US Flexes Mafia Muscle to Derail Global Shipping's Green Deal

2025-11-06 14:31 Last Updated At:14:31

Last Friday, Trump flat-out torpedoed a much-anticipated zero-emissions deal for the global shipping industry, smashing it apart at the United Nations' International Maritime Organization (IMO). The Financial Times lays it all bare: to kill the net-zero shipping pact, Trump didn’t just lean on the usual diplomatic muscle—Washington went full gangster. Think raised port fees, outright bans on ships passing through America, and direct threats, and even personal intimidation of diplomats and their families, with entry bans waved in their faces like warning flags.

The Financial Times lays it out: over a dozen diplomats, foreign officials, and industry insiders watched the US throw diplomacy in the mud at last month’s London summit. Washington came armed with bullying tactics, determined to smash the net-zero shipping pact by brute force.

US Bullying Blocks IMO’s Green Shipping Deal—Vote Delayed a Year. IMO website image.

US Bullying Blocks IMO’s Green Shipping Deal—Vote Delayed a Year. IMO website image.

US officials didn’t bother with backroom deals—they stalked the halls, cornering diplomats from Africa, the Pacific, and the Caribbean. The message was simple: cross the United States, and your ships might not reach America. Rock the boat, and your family could be locked out. These weren’t idle whispers. The intimidation played out in broad daylight during coffee breaks.

Social Media Taunts, Policy Upends

Trump didn’t bother hiding his true feelings. On social media, he slammed the agreement as a “global green shipping tax scam.” But this wasn’t just venting. In April, most countries had already green-lit the framework. It was set to become real policy—until Trump’s team blew it up, forcing a one-year “pause.” The global momentum froze on the spot.

One diplomat cut to the heart of it: “It’s like the streets of New York.” His country got the warning firsthand—keep backing the deal, and watch your sailors’ visas disappear. US port fees? Those would rise too. Another attendee was even more blunt: IMO bigwigs were left gobsmacked. “It’s like dealing with the mafia,” they said. “You don’t need details. You just know: cross us, and you’ll pay.”

The US State Department kept mum on the intimidation claims. Instead, American officials handed out praise to Greece and Cyprus. Those two broke rank from the rest of the EU—they cast abstention votes in the big one-year adjournment, even after they already gave the framework the green light back in April.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, ahead of the IMO meeting in London, issued a joint statement with senior Trump officials warning that the administration was "evaluating sanctions on officials sponsoring activist-driven climate policies that would burden American consumers, among other measures under consideration." As Greece and Cyprus sided with the U.S., much of Europe—and the world—reacted with surprise.

Global Rules or American Muscle?

Chatham House’s head of global economy Creon Butler didn’t mince words. The US, he said, has ditched long-standing diplomatic etiquette. Instead, Washington's now muscling countries into backing its stance—especially on climate.

America Threatens: Support This, Your Crews and Ports Pay.

America Threatens: Support This, Your Crews and Ports Pay.

“In the very short term this might work, but in the medium term it increases the chances that non-US countries will conclude they cannot work with the US, making agreements independently among themselves which simply work around the US,” he said. Sooner or later, the rest of the world will ink deals that leave America in the dust.

The pushback reached fever pitch at the IMO. Brazil, among others, called out the methods “that should not ever be used among sovereign nations”. Washington wasn’t just rattling individuals—entire capitals, from Bangladesh to Japan and Indonesia, got notes threatening diplomatic smackdowns.

But let’s step back. The drive for a net-zero shipping pact isn’t about feel-good climate slogans.

As Niu Tanqin from Xinhua puts it: The pact itself is a brass-tacks response to global warming’s mounting cost. Whether you like it or not, global warming is simply an undisputable fact. Everyone is scrambling to stall off the climate catastrophes looming on the horizon.

So, in order to squeeze carbon emission: if your ship emits less than the set limit, you’re rewarded. Above the cut-off, you pay. China, the EU, Japan, India, Brazil—all were in. Even the big shipping companies joined the chorus.

Only a handful of oil states—think Saudi Arabia, Russia, the UAE—pushed back. Pacific island nations, unconvinced the pact was tough enough, simply abstained.

Trump Says Global Warming’s a Scam—US Walks Out.

Trump Says Global Warming’s a Scam—US Walks Out.

Then, everything changed. Once Trump 2.0 manifested, the US flipped from supporter to saboteur. In his mind, climate change is a hoax—or worse, a Chinese plot to corner American interests. Stopping this agreement wasn’t just policy—it was personal. He didn’t mind stooping low—pulling out every trick in the high school bully’s playbook: pressure, threats, and outright intimidation to make sure America got its way.

One official wasn’t shy: “It was completely exceptional. I have never heard of anything like this in the context of an IMO negotiation. These people [being threatened] are just bureaucrats, they are civil servants.”

If international law becomes a mere cheap disguise, you can bet real power will be the one pulling the strings.

Pause Button Pressed—World Left Reeling

Now, the deal waits on ice for another year, while “the world stares, shell-shocked”—witnesses to a new era of American brinkmanship.

Not the first time, either. Just look at tariffs: if Washington’s unhappy, it writes its own tax bill—no debate required. Venezuela and Nigeria have both fielded threats of military action; Canada and Panama know the taste of territorial intimidation. Lawless? That’s par for the course.

  

But payback, as always, has a funny way of coming due. Today, the US bullies island nations and slaps down climate claims. Tomorrow, who’s next? When “might makes right” replaces rules, every nation that depends on order will lose out. True justice may come late—but it never skips its date. Chip away at the pillars of fairness, and sooner or later, you bury the very house you live in.

The real question: how long can America’s strong-arm show go on before the world walks out?




Deep Throat

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

CNN just laid out the evidence in four charts, which explained why China had the upper hand at the Busan summit.

On November 2, the network pulled official data from China's General Administration of Customs and the US Department of Agriculture to show exactly how Beijing outmaneuvered Washington in this trade standoff. By the time Chinese and US leaders sat down in Busan, South Korea, on October 30 to hammer out what observers are calling a one-year "ceasefire," China had already shifted the playing board.

Xi and Trump face off in Busan—numbers speak first. AP Photo

Xi and Trump face off in Busan—numbers speak first. AP Photo

The data confirms it—China followed through on its promises to reduce dependence on US markets, and American negotiators had to adjust accordingly.

US Market Share Shrinks

CNN's first chart tracks a stark shift: “The US now accounts for around 10% of Chinese exports, down from more than 15% a year ago.” The decline started before Trump's second term even began, then accelerated sharply in recent months. September's numbers tell the story—China's exports to the US hit $34.3 billion, down 27% from $47 billion the year prior.

The network's reporting confirms what trade watchers suspected: Beijing wasn't bluffing about pivoting away from US dependency.

Despite the US trade plunge, China's overall exports grew 6.1% this year, with September posting an 8.3% year-on-year jump. CNN's second chart makes the point visually—while US trade cratered, exports to the EU and ASEAN surged. China didn't just survive the trade war; it found new customers and expanded market share elsewhere.

The data shows China successfully executed its diversification strategy while US farmers and ranchers watched their market access evaporate.

The Soybean Shift

CNN's third and fourth charts zero in on two agricultural commodities that matter: soybeans and beef. The network notes that US soybeans have long been central to trade negotiations between Beijing and Washington. The September 2025 data marks a milestone—for the first time in years, China imported zero US soybeans that month. Not a single bushel.

Instead, Brazil and Argentina stepped in to fill the gap. Both South American countries saw continuous export growth to China throughout the period. When Argentina temporarily lifted soybean export taxes in September, China promptly purchased approximately 1.2 million tonnes from the country.

Chicago soybean futures—a benchmark for global prices—rose in the days before the Busan summit. After the leaders met, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced on Thursday, October 30, that China agreed to purchase 12 million tonnes of soybeans this season and committed to buying 25 million tonnes annually for the next three years.

Beef Exports Collapse

The beef numbers reveal an even more dramatic collapse. China ranks as the third-largest buyer of US beef, but purchases dropped like a stone in recent months. According to US Department of Agriculture data, China bought $481 million worth of US beef from January to July this year—just 8% of total US beef exports. That's a 47% decline from the same period last year, when Chinese purchases accounted for 15% of US exports.

September's figures are even starker. China's General Administration of Customs reported importing just $11 million worth of US beef last month—a 90% plunge from the $110 million imported in September last year. Australia and Argentina picked up the slack, increasing their beef shipments to China as US ranchers lost access.

These four charts provide a straightforward answer to why the side that initially escalated tensions—the US—eventually "backed down" and pursued constructive dialogue with China. The data shows Beijing meant what it said about diversifying trade partners and proved capable of executing that strategy.

Belt and Road Delivers

The Economist reported this month that China's "thriving" Belt and Road Initiative played a positive role in this round of US-China competition. The publication noted that the initiative promoted China's trade diversification on two fronts: Chinese component manufacturers expanded their export markets through factories established in Belt and Road countries, while those same countries developed their own industrial export capabilities—further strengthening China's resilience in global supply chains.

Recommended Articles