For decades, American foreign policy has been a cornerstone of global stability—a steady framework within which allies and adversaries alike have navigated their international relationships. Under President Donald Trump, however, this framework took on a markedly unpredictable character, or so it appeared. Trump’s first-term foreign policy was less unpredictable than incoherent—a critical distinction that reveals much about the mechanisms driving his administration. Trump’s second-term foreign policy will likely be built on the same core motivations as the first: transactionalism, economic nationalism, and skepticism of multilateralism.
In her analysis of Trump’s first-term foreign policy, Dr. Ruth Deyermond of King’s College London begins with a striking observation: Trump’s foreign policy decisions were not as erratic as they seemed at first glance. Instead, they stemmed from a consistent, if troubling, set of personal motivations. These motivations—money, status, and an unchanging worldview formed decades prior—produced a foreign policy marked by an unusual lack of alignment between the president’s statements and the actions of his administration.
Trump’s approach often bypassed institutional norms, relying instead on personal instincts and transactional goals. For instance, his admiration for authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un baffled traditional policymakers but fit neatly within his worldview. Trump viewed international relations as a zero-sum game, where the success of others implied a loss for the United States unless the outcome directly benefited him or his administration. This transactional mindset shaped key decisions, such as his withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and the Iran nuclear deal—moves that aligned with his base’s nationalist sentiment but alienated long-standing allies.
Headlines Over Strategy
A hallmark of Trump’s presidency was its reliance on headline-grabbing announcements. As Dr. Deyermond notes, these pronouncements were more about dominating news cycles than providing clarity or advancing coherent strategies. For example, Trump’s abrupt declaration in December 2018 that the United States would withdraw troops from Syria caught even his own advisors off guard. The move, ostensibly aimed at fulfilling a campaign promise, lacked a detailed exit strategy, leaving allies like the Kurdish forces vulnerable to Turkish aggression.
This pattern of attention-seeking proclamations extended to his dealings with NATO. Trump repeatedly criticized member countries for failing to meet defense spending commitments, at one point suggesting the U.S. might not honor its collective defense obligations under Article 5. While his rhetoric resonated with domestic audiences frustrated by perceived freeloading, it unnerved European allies, who began questioning the reliability of American commitments.
Personal Interests Over National Strategy
One of Dr. Deyermond’s most striking assertions is that the Trump administration’s foreign policy often prioritized the personal interests of those in power over national objectives. The clearest example of this dynamic was the administration’s relationship with Ukraine. Trump’s withholding of military aid to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into announcing an investigation into Joe Biden’s son exemplified the conflation of personal political goals with national foreign policy. The impeachment proceedings that followed underscored the dangers of subordinating strategic considerations to individual gain.
Similarly, Trump’s dealings with Saudi Arabia highlighted the administration’s transactional approach. Despite widespread condemnation of the Saudi government following the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Trump defended the U.S.-Saudi relationship, citing lucrative arms deals and the kingdom’s role in countering Iranian influence. The prioritization of economic benefits over human rights further underscored the administration’s narrow, self-serving focus.
The Erosion of Trust Among Allies
Under Trump, America’s relationships with its traditional allies faced unprecedented strain. Dr. Deyermond warns that it would be “spectacularly unwise” for allies to assume the security of their intelligence-sharing relationships with the U.S. The president’s tendency to disregard protocol—such as his sharing of sensitive intelligence with Russian officials in 2017—undermined the trust that underpins these partnerships. European leaders, in particular, struggled to navigate this new reality.
While they publicly emphasized the importance of transatlantic cooperation, behind closed doors, many began exploring ways to reduce their reliance on the U.S. for security. German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s call for Europe to “take its fate into its own hands” reflected a growing consensus that the continent needed to bolster its strategic autonomy.
A Long-Term Shift in Global Dynamics
The incoherence of Trump’s foreign policy during his first term has had lasting implications for the international order. By undermining alliances and withdrawing from multilateral agreements, the administration created a vacuum that other powers were eager to fill. China, for example, capitalized on America’s retreat by expanding its influence through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative and asserting its dominance in the South China Sea.
Russia, too, benefited from Trump’s ambivalence toward NATO and his reluctance to confront Moscow’s aggression. The administration’s mixed messages on Ukraine—ranging from Trump’s personal overtures to his support for military aid—highlighted the inconsistencies that emboldened adversaries.
Lessons for the Future
The first Trump presidency demonstrated that a lack of coherence at the top can have cascading effects throughout the international system, eroding trust among allies and emboldening adversaries.
The fallout from Trump’s foreign policy decisions continued to influence the international stage during the Biden administration. It sought to repair strained alliances and reaffirm America’s commitment to multilateralism. However, rebuilding trust was no simple task. Allies remained cautious, wary of the potential for future administrations to revert to the unpredictability of the Trump era – which has now been realized.
In Europe, the move toward strategic autonomy has gained momentum. Initiatives such as the European Union’s Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) in defense highlight efforts to reduce dependency on U.S. security guarantees. Similarly, NATO’s efforts to address non-military threats, including cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns, reflect a broader understanding of the need for diversified strategies in an increasingly multipolar world. For many allies, maintaining a facade of partnership was essential to preserving diplomatic channels and mitigating the risks associated with Trump’s erratic policies. This political setup has now returned.
Meanwhile, China and Russia continue to leverage the uncertainties introduced already during Trump’s first presidency. Beijing’s assertive stance in the Indo-Pacific and Moscow’s continued interference in Western democracies underscore the challenges facing Trump’s second-term administration as it seeks to counterbalance these adversarial powers.
The trajectory of U.S. foreign policy often resists sudden, dramatic shifts due to the country’s entrenched global influence in military, economic, and political spheres. Institutional inertia and external pressures, including those from allies and Congress, tend to constrain drastic changes by any incoming administration. However, Donald Trump’s foreign policy, characterized by its transactional nature and unpredictability, has led many to speculate on how a potential second term might unfold.
Richard Fontaine, CEO of the Center for a New American Security, highlights that U.S. foreign policy often shows more continuity than change across administrations. While media narratives tend to emphasize differences between presidents, many policies—particularly toward major powers like China and Russia—remain consistent. In a second Trump term, analysts predict a reinforcement of some of his first-term approaches, with certain policy areas seeing renewed focus.
Relations with China and Russia
Under Trump, U.S. relations with China were defined by economic competition and strategic rivalry. His administration imposed tariffs on Chinese goods and maintained a strong military presence in East Asia. Analysts anticipate that a second Trump administration would continue these policies, doubling down on economic pressure while avoiding direct military conflict. While Biden has pursued dialogue with President Xi Jinping, Trump’s approach has been more confrontational, though both leaders share a commitment to countering China’s influence. On Taiwan, Trump’s stance has been ambiguous, contrasting with Biden’s clear pledge of defense against potential Chinese aggression.
Regarding Russia, Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin has raised questions about his commitment to NATO and the broader transatlantic alliance. While Trump’s rhetoric has often undermined confidence in U.S. security guarantees, European diplomats suggest that fears of his withdrawal from NATO are overstated. Nonetheless, a second term could see further strain on U.S.-European relations as Trump prioritizes transactional diplomacy over multilateral cooperation.
Middle East: Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel
In the Middle East, Trump’s policies are expected to remain focused on countering Iran’s influence. During his first term, Trump withdrew from the 2015 nuclear agreement and imposed stringent sanctions, prompting Iran to advance its nuclear program. While he has hinted at openness to renegotiating with Tehran, analysts predict a tougher stance overall, potentially escalating tensions in the region. Trump’s willingness to take bold actions, such as the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, underscores his unpredictable approach to dealing with Iran.
In Saudi Arabia, Trump’s close relationship with the Kingdom is likely to continue. Despite widespread criticism over human rights issues, Trump has consistently prioritized economic and strategic interests, such as arms deals and countering Iranian influence, over moral considerations. This aligns with the broader U.S. approach, as even Biden, who initially sought to isolate Saudi Arabia, ultimately maintained strong ties due to the Kingdom’s oil power and regional significance.
On Israel, Trump’s unwavering support for Benjamin Netanyahu and the Abraham Accords has cemented his legacy as a staunch ally of the Israeli government. However, his opposition to Israeli annexation of the West Bank suggests a degree of pragmatism in balancing diplomatic objectives. Analysts expect this pragmatic streak to continue, with Trump likely prioritizing the expansion of normalization agreements between Israel and Arab states.
Latin America and Afghanistan
Trump’s policies toward Cuba, Venezuela, and Afghanistan during his first term showed remarkable consistency, characterized by a focus on sanctions and a reluctance to engage in nation-building. In a second term, these policies are unlikely to shift significantly, as Trump’s approach to these regions reflects his broader emphasis on minimizing U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts while leveraging economic tools to achieve strategic objectives.
Transactionalism and Economic Nationalism Ahead
While Trump’s foreign policy often appeared unpredictable, its core motivations—transactionalism, economic nationalism, and skepticism of multilateralism—provided a consistent framework. A second Trump term is likely to amplify these tendencies, with a continued focus on economic competition with China, a hardline stance on Iran, and a prioritization of U.S. interests over traditional alliances. As analysts and diplomats brace for the potential return of Trump’s unique brand of diplomacy, the international community remains watchful of its implications for global stability.
Read more:
- Kings College – Ruth Deyermond: Thoughts on the reporting and the reality of the Trump administration’s foreign policy
- ABC News: ANALYSIS: How Trump’s foreign policy has affected global relations since assuming office
- Foreign Affairs: Trump and the World
- NYCFPA: Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy: A Comprehensive Analysis
