With his landslide victory in the US presidential election, Donald Trump can now claim broad powers to implement domestic and international policy.
Importantly, these results show that you should never bet on your own personal interests. Both for politicians and for American voters who expect them to “solve” their problems by ignoring the most flawed of the characters.
The guardrails that constrained President Trump’s first term — a hostile Senate, Republican opponents, and public servants dedicated to serving the country rather than individuals — have been removed, or may soon be It will be bent to your will.
The impact of a confident, unfettered Trump 2.0 on the world will largely depend on what foreign policy path he charts and who he appoints to key positions.
In it, we need to look at who will be chosen to follow his commands, and who will take their place when they inevitably become unpopular. The initial list of potential appointees includes:
Darko Vojinovic/AP
Alex Brandon/Associated Press
Mike Pompeo, a former secretary of state and CIA director during the Trump administration’s first term, could eventually join the Pentagon as secretary of defense.
Even Trump’s first national security adviser, Mike Flynn, who lied about his contacts with Russia’s ambassador to the United States and resigned after just 22 days in office, has been mentioned in discussions about senior positions.
Elbridge Colby, a former Pentagon official and self-proclaimed strategic policy expert, agrees.
President Trump will demand unwavering loyalty from his appointees while claiming full credit for their accomplishments. But as he ages, it is also likely that he will rely heavily on them to lead the direction of strategic policy.
With that in mind, here are three paths the Trump administration could take on the world stage.
1) America first, with compromises.
Mr. Trump, who has touted his credentials as a peace negotiator, could return the United States to isolationism and exceptionalism, essentially a friend and enemy to no one.
That could mean withdrawing from NATO altogether, or making U.S. security aid too conditional on transatlantic allegiance, leaving Europe essentially captive to his whims.
It also has the following meanings:
Reduce US support for alliances in the Asia-Pacific region
Demand ever-higher levels of defense spending from our security partners
It has cast a critical eye on any agreement that might require the United States to commit significant resources or reduce its own military capabilities.
Australia, for example, will be keen to extract assurances of continued support from the White House for the AUKUS partnership. This includes technology sharing between the US and UK, as well as Australia’s purchase of several nuclear submarines in the early 2030s.
The deal is almost certain to be scrutinized by the Trump administration, despite strong support from Republicans in both houses of Congress.
But Trump will need to make tradeoffs to achieve a more isolationist position.
First, major negotiations with Russia will be necessary. This is not just because President Trump praises President Vladimir Putin, but because he has promised to quickly end the war in Ukraine.
Russian ultranationalists are elated by President Trump’s victory, but the Biden administration is desperate to secure US$6 billion (A$9 billion) in military aid for Kiev before the transfer of power in January It has become. Therefore, President Trump cannot immediately count on a weakened Ukraine as a precursor to a peace agreement.
Second, negotiations with China may be necessary in the medium term. Endless trade wars based on retaliatory tariffs will increase U.S. inflation and hurt President Trump’s blue-collar and rural voters.
2) Strong pivot to Asia
Trump’s national security supporters have repeatedly called for a confrontational approach to China, and his frustration with America’s European allies, whom he believes are free-riding on U.S. defense spending. Combined with this, there is a possibility that Mr. Trump will shift his focus to Asia instead.
But this will require deeper negotiations with Moscow. That would have to include not just a deal to end the war in Ukraine, but also a more comprehensive agreement to reduce the US-Russian conflict.
There is no guarantee that Putin will comply, but it would free up American resources to confront China militarily and economically. The new Trump administration will include many China hawks like Colby, a Trump supporter who has long argued that Beijing poses the most serious threat to American power.
But this path will require a firm commitment from Trump (not his power). It would also require more concrete U.S. security guarantees to allies in the Asia-Pacific region, in exchange for promises not only to help contain China but also to prepare for participation in potential conflict. .
If President Trump abandons America’s NATO allies, it remains to be seen how even his closest Asian partners will evaluate his security efforts and regional crisis management capabilities.
3) Peace through power
A third option would be for President Trump to induce former US President Ronald Reagan to try to restore and maintain US primacy in the world. America will lead, but it will be pragmatic and work with allies that align with its interests.
This would be quite a task, not to mention a lot of money. That would require significant military spending, investment in research and development, reestablishing U.S. dominance in critical technologies, and finding alternative solutions to supply chains currently dominated by China.
It would also mean doubling down on strategic competition with China and preparing to effectively arm proxies (not just allies) to put pressure on China.
However, this too may have its limits. As President Trump has repeatedly demonstrated, he believes that national and personal interests are essentially the same thing.
For example, Riyadh will surely approve of President Trump’s desire to crack down on Iran, although the desire to give Israel a complete free hand will need to be tempered by extensive ties with Saudi Arabia.
And how President Trump deals with dictators will likely come under scrutiny.
In the past, his open praise for President Vladimir Putin, Chinese leader Xi Jinping and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un has given U.S. partners pause. President Trump’s goals are also being hindered.
Evan Vucci/Associated Press
chaos and change
Either of these paths would lead to instability and difficult choices for U.S. partners.
President Putin will force President Trump to win some kind of peace on the Ukraine issue by simply refusing to negotiate until the White House puts enough pressure on Kiev to surrender. And a fragile peace on the Russian side, with painful concessions on the Ukrainian side, would give rise to a violent rebel movement and decisively weaken European security.
Europe is now at a crossroads. Ultimately, it will have to face the prospect of being responsible for its own security and defense against a resurgent Russia. Going forward, we will need to move quickly, spend far more on defense, and overcome devastating institutional inertia.
It would also accelerate a new European security order that is already taking shape, with Poland, the Baltic states, the Nordic states and the UK as the main bulwarks against Russia.
In Asia and the Pacific, doubts about the United States’ commitment to security will foster a regional arms race and increase the likelihood of nuclear proliferation. Countries such as Japan, South Korea, Australia, and the Philippines will also need to step up efforts to cooperate without the United States. It will be easier for some people than others.
What’s the result? Trust, shared values, and a commitment to a stable rules-based order are what have sustained and deepened our security partnership.
At the very least, Trump 2.0 will keep most US allies wary for the time being. But the greatest tragedy of all would be that he would use his mandate to pursue a campaign of promised revenge against his enemies at home, deporting millions of people, and creating a Potemkin democracy.
I really hope that doesn’t happen. But again, don’t bet against your own personal interests.
