In his second term, US President Donald Trump promises to reshape Washington’s foreign policy. Many remember how he disrupted alliances, challenged international institutions and prioritized America’s interests over multilateral commitments during his first term (2017–2021). Trump’s approach, “Trumpism” if you will, has left America’s global partners unsettled.

Trump 2.0 has erected challenges to the future of international cooperation. Trump has withdrawn the US from the Paris Climate Accords and the World Health Organization. He has consistently criticized his NATO partners and threatened to withdraw the US from the alliance. These actions show Trump’s overt disdain for the established rules-based global order.

Meanwhile, US dominance is fading. Countries like Russia, China and Iran are asserting themselves more frequently. They have sought to cooperate with each other in order to reduce dependence on US-led institutions. The expanding BRICS alliance (a coalition of emerging economies originally composed of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) is a counterweight to the G7 (US, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan).

With NATO members forced to reconsider the US as a “necessary partner” rather than an “ally,” while being caught between an increasingly unreliable US and the “no limits” China-Russia axis, countries have begun to hedge their bets as global stability becomes more fragile. Whether it’s Poland’s declared intention to acquire nuclear weapons, increased interest of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member-states towards BRICS or Emanuel Macron’s renewed calls for “strategic autonomy,” US allies have had to rethink their reliance on the US.

Personality over policy

Understanding Trump’s foreign policy requires looking at both US diplomatic relations and his personal relationships with national leaders. His praise for world leaders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping often contrasts with his policies of aggression toward Russia and China. This suggests that his interactions with individual leaders shape US foreign policy as much as conventional national interests do.

Rather than relying on long-standing global agreements, Trump favors direct, one-on-one negotiations. He is a real estate developer, after all, and he believes his deal-making skills give the US an upper hand. This causes Trump to rely more on his personal perceptions than on the institutional wisdom of technocrats.

Political scientist Josep Colmer argues that Trump’s decision-making remains highly flexible, driven more by instinct than ideology. Trumpism is reactionary and populist, often disregarding the traditional moral and democratic principles that have shaped American diplomacy.

Critics argue that this weakens the US’s global image. However, a degree of pragmatism does have its place in US tradition. By prioritizing national interests over multilateral cooperation, Trump is echoing strong Republican predecessors like Theodore Roosevelt and Richard Nixon.

Although many label Trump an isolationist, his strategy is more complex. He has revived old ideas like the Monroe Doctrine, asserting influence in Latin America while blocking Old World powers from the region. His remarks about making Canada the 51st state, purchasing Greenland and reclaiming control over the Panama Canal reflect this vision, as does his use of historical narratives like “Manifest Destiny” to frame policy decisions.

However, his push to reduce US involvement abroad comes with risks. Big Tech, whose success depends on globalization, may resist his policies. This corporate influence, coupled with Trump’s personality-driven and reactive policymaking, makes a complete US withdrawal from the global stage unlikely. Instead, his leadership signals a world order that remains global but operates on his terms. 

[Kaitlyn Diana edited this piece]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.