Original author: TechFlow
The global financial market is being swept by a sudden cold wave.
After Trump announced his extreme policy of imposing reciprocal tariffs on almost all trading partners, panic in the global capital market reached its peak:
As of 10 p.m. EST on April 7, SP 500 futures fell 5.98% and Nasdaq 100 futures fell 6.2%. Dow Jones futures fell 5.5%.
The Asian market was full of risk aversion, with the Nikkei index falling 8.9% in early trading. The Taiwan Weighted Index plunged nearly 10% after a two-day holiday, and major stocks such as TSMC and Foxconn were triggered.
The crypto market was not immune.
Investors watched their assets shrink, and red lines on crypto trading screens were like alarms, foreshadowing greater turmoil.
Data from CoinGlass showed that cryptocurrency liquidations have surged to about $892 million, including more than $300 million in long and short positions in Bitcoin.
BTC has fallen to around $77,000, while ETH has even reached $1,500.
The clarion call of the trade war has sounded again, and at the center of the storm is Trumps senior trade adviser Peter Navarro.
On April 6, Navarro appeared in an interview on Fox News.
He tried to calm investors and used ridiculous language in the interview:
The first rule, especially for small investors, is that unless you sell your stocks now, you cant lose money. The smart strategy is not to panic and hold on.
Floating loss is not a loss, not selling means no loss.
It is hard to imagine that such ineffective consolation, which is close to the style of spiritual victory, came from the mouth of a senior presidential trade adviser and university economics professor.
This statement obviously failed to calm the markets anxiety, but instead made people focus on him - this Harvard PhD, who is nicknamed non-mainstream economist by the outside world, seems to be not only a spokesperson for the policy, but also an important driving force behind extreme trade protectionism.
Even Musk, who has a good relationship with President Trump, publicly expressed his criticism and sarcasm of the presidential adviser on social media a few days ago, saying bluntly that obtaining a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard is not a good thing, as it may lead to wrong decisions due to excessive arrogance; and questioned whether Navarro had never created any substantial results personally.
Who is this economist standing behind Trump? How did he promote this tariff policy storm that swept the world?
From the fringes of academia to the heart of White House decision-making, Navarros life story intersects with Trumps protectionist ideas, perhaps contributing to this crisis.
From academic to political marginal figure
Peter Navarros story begins on July 15, 1959, in an ordinary family in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
His father, Albert Al Navarro, was a saxophone and clarinetist, and his mother, Evelyn Littlejohn, was a secretary at Sax Fifth Avenue.
However, this family time was short-lived and turbulent, as his parents divorced when he was 9 or 10, leaving Navarro and his mother to move between Palm Beach, Florida, and Bethesda, Maryland.
Perhaps the experience of growing up in a single-parent family planted a desire for stability and independence in his heart, which eventually sprouted quietly when he completed his studies at Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School in Maryland.
In 1972, Navarro entered Tufts University with an academic scholarship and earned a bachelors degree. In the same year, he joined the United States Peace Corps and served in Thailand for three years. This experience gave him his first exposure to the complexity of the international community, which may have laid the groundwork for his future concern about global trade imbalances.
In 1979, he received a masters degree in public administration from Harvard University, and then won a doctorate under the guidance of economics master Richard E. Caves in 1986. With the degree in hand, he chose to stay in academia and served as a professor of economics and public policy at the University of California, Irvine from 1989, a position he held for decades until he became a professor emeritus.
However, Navarro is not a man who is satisfied with studying. He has entered politics five times and tried to put his ideas into practice.
In 1992, he ran for mayor of San Diego, winning the primary with 38.2% of the vote, but lost in the runoff with 48%;
After that, he ran for the city council, the county board of supervisors, and the congressional seat, but all failed—41.9% of the votes in the 1996 congressional election and only 7.85% in the 2001 city council special election. These failures did not make him back off, but instead highlighted his persistence and marginalized characteristics.
During his campaign, he repeatedly emphasized economic protectionism and employment priority, which echoed Trumps later America First, but failed to win the favor of voters at the time.
From a teenager from a single-parent family, to a Harvard PhD in economics, to a marginal political figure who has been defeated time and again, Navarros trajectory is full of contradictions.
He appears to be both a rigorous scholar and a radical activist; he has left his mark in the academic world and suffered repeated setbacks in the political arena.
Amid the twists and turns in academia and politics, the seeds of trade protectionism and a tough attitude toward China seem to have been sown long ago.
The China Threat Theory Has Already Been Presence
From the moment Peter Navarro received his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University, he was destined not to be satisfied with the peace in the ivory tower.
His subsequent trajectory showed that the newly minted PhD had developed a keen interest in the global economic landscape.
When he joined the University of California, Irvine in 1989, he began to turn his academic passion into a sharp critique of a rising power: China.
What really attracted his attention was a series of works promoting the China threat theory.
In 2006, he published The Coming China Wars, in which he warned, almost prophetically, that Chinas economic expansion was not only business competition but also an existential threat to the U.S. manufacturing industry.
The book reveals a kind of stubbornness that is almost prejudiced, such as Chinas development is a threat to mankind and will bring more conflicts and instability to the world.
At that time, most readers book reviews on Amazon believed that the book was suspected of being deliberately hyped and sensational.
Although this book did not resonate widely in the mainstream economics community, it caused ripples in some conservative circles.
Five years later, Navarro’s critique reached a climax with his 2011 book, Death by China, which was more of an indictment than an academic analysis.
He radically accused China of systematically destroying the foundation of the U.S. economy through illegal export subsidies, production subsidies, currency manipulation, and intellectual property theft...
However, Navarros views are not without controversy.
Mainstream economists, such as Simon Johnson of MIT, have publicly criticized his analysis as too one-sided and ignoring the complexity of global supply chains; and Navarros tough words in the book are in sharp contrast to his generally accepted elegant academic image, and have also made him labeled an outlier in the economics community.
However, Navarro used his academic experience over the past decade to develop a theory of trade confrontation with China, which states that the United States must use tough measures to reverse the trade deficit and protect domestic industries. This theory also laid the groundwork for his entry into Trumps decision-making circle in the future.
His pen has long been directed towards China, and fate will open a bigger door for him in 2016.
Promoted by Trumps son-in-law, he entered the inner circle
The book Deadly China did not cause any waves in the mainstream economics community, but it unexpectedly opened the door to Trumps campaign team.
Reportedly, during Trumps 2016 campaign before his first term, his son-in-law Jared Kushner stumbled upon it on Amazon and was attracted by its sharp criticism of Chinas trade practices, and then recommended the book to Donald Trump.
Trump was very impressed after reading it, saying, This guy understands my thinking.
Navarro later recalled that his role from the beginning was to provide analytical support for Trumps trade intuition. Trump, who was born as a businessman, was well versed in trade, and the twos thoughts may have coincided in underlying logic, and their fate was ignited.
On January 20, 2017, the same day Trump was sworn in, Navarro officially entered the White House and served as director of the newly established National Trade Council.
His first order of business was no surprise: China. He quickly pushed for a 43% tariff on Chinese goods and oversaw a 25% surcharge on steel and aluminum imports.
When the Sino-US trade war was in full swing in 2018, Navarro was omnipresent. He declared at a White House briefing: China must pay the price for its unfair trade.
This year, he also helped draft Trumps tariff order on global steel and aluminum imports, which directly led to trade frictions with the European Union and Canada. Navarros toughness not only caters to Trumps America First policy, but also allows him to gain a firm foothold in the White House.
However, Navarros days in the inner circle were not all smooth sailing.
In 2020, he published a report alleging election fraud and participated in the Green Bay Sweep plan on January 6, 2021, which ultimately led to a four-month prison sentence for contempt of Congress in 2023. Despite this, Trumps trust in him has not diminished, and he even called him a loyal warrior in prison.
On January 20, 2025, Trump returned to the White House, and Navarro also returned as a senior trade and manufacturing adviser. This time, his goals were more radical.
In February, he co-led economic discussions with Stephen Miller on tariffs against Canada, China, and Mexico, driving the trade policy memorandum signed by Trump on his first day.
Navarro’s “reciprocal tariffs” — additional tariffs based on trade deficits, such as 46% for Vietnam and 20% for the European Union — became the cornerstone of the new policy. He defended it in an interview with CNBC: “These are not bargaining chips, but necessities of a national emergency.”
This position is consistent with his academic advocacy more than ten years ago.
From a book in 2016 to a trade war brain in 2025, Navarros connection with Trump is no accident.
His protectionist ideas are highly consistent with Trumps aversion to trade deficits; his tough personality perfectly matches Trumps policy style.
Despite being surrounded by controversy and even being imprisoned, Navarro has always been the soul of Trumps trade strategy. His move from the academic fringe to the center of power was not only due to luck, but also his obsession with trade confrontation.
The best strategy is to attack the enemys plan, the worst is to attack the city
The outcome of this convergence between Trump and Navarro will face its most severe test in the global market in 2025.
Let’s go back to what Navarro said at the beginning, “If you don’t sell stocks, you won’t lose money.” Does this non-mainstream economist really understand the logic of economic operations?
Navarro may be well versed in tariff data, but he seems to have not grasped the essence of military strategy.
The Art of War by Sun Tzu says: The best strategy is to attack the enemys plans, the next best is to attack their alliances, the next best is to attack their troops, and the worst is to attack their cities. To defeat the enemy without fighting is the best strategy.
The wisdom of our ancestors is to win through strategy and diplomacy rather than direct warfare.
However, Navarro and Trumps tariff war is just the opposite - choosing a head-on conflict and exchanging so-called fairness for a high economic price.
This head-on approach has not only failed to weaken the opponent, but has also made American companies and consumers bear the brunt. Economists estimate that the 60% tariff on China will push up the price of imported goods, and the American people will ultimately pay the bill.
The reality is far from being just paper talk.
His role as a driving force behind the global economy is undisputed, but whether the cost of this war is worth it remains unknown.
