The Diplomat author Mercy Kuo regularly engages subject-matter experts, policy practitioners, and strategic thinkers across the globe for their diverse insights into U.S. Asia policy. This conversation with Dr. Tiberio Graziani – chairman of Vision and Global Trends’ International Institute for Global Analyses in Rome – is the 449th in “The Trans-Pacific View Insight Series.”
What will be the likely impact of a Trump 2.0 presidency on U.S. foreign policy?
The Trump 2.0 presidency, as largely anticipated during the 2017-2021 term and repeatedly proclaimed during the latest presidential campaign, is expected to consolidate the “America First” agenda, which focuses on greater attention to national interests – as perceived by Trump and his supporters – and less emphasis on multilateral alliances.
The domestic policy agenda – based on the development of domestic industrial production – will resonate in Washington’s relationships with its allies and major global players, particularly Beijing. The fight against the so-called “deep state” will have repercussions on Washington’s traditional alliances; Trump will therefore need to find new interlocutors within the Western system, likely among the so-called sovereigntists or populists.
Under Trump, the U.S. will continue to pursue a policy of strengthening national defense, with particular attention to hegemony in the Western hemisphere, potentially reviving – adapting it to the present day – a version of the Monroe Doctrine. In foreign policy, Trump is likely to maintain a defensive but determined stance toward China and Russia, seeking to hinder and slow the transition toward a multipolar order. Policies toward emerging countries, especially those in the Global South, may focus more on bilateral agreements rather than multilateral treaties. This emphasis on bilateral practices will further weaken international organizations like the U.N. and other institutions created after World War II. Thus, Trump’s foreign policy will also impact traditional international law, accelerating its structural transformation.
Examine how Trump’s “America First” agenda will affect great power dynamics with China and Russia.
As mentioned above, Trump’s “America First” agenda implies a shift away from multilateral cooperation policies to focus on protecting U.S. economic and military interests. Regarding China, further deterioration of relations is expected, with the aim of reducing U.S. dependence on Chinese imports and strengthening domestic industrial production. Moreover, the growing focus on technological and space competitiveness will likely lead to even stronger rivalry with Beijing in the medium term. Regarding Russia, Trump will likely move strategically to further hinder its influence in Europe and other key regions, such as Central Asia and Africa, trying to gain advantages without overly compromising already difficult bilateral relations. In summary, the dynamics with China and Russia will be marked by strategic competition, with Trump pushing for a power balance favorable to the U.S. without risking direct conflict.
Analyze the Trump administration’s worldview and implications for reconfiguring the current world order.
The Trump administration views the world as a place of rivalry between great powers, where the U.S. must reaffirm its leadership, starting with total control of the Western Hemisphere.
Its foreign policy, beyond the media narrative, will not stray far from the traditional positioning of the U.S. in the international arena: national primacy, maintenance, and strengthening of global projection. The strengthening of national defense will translate into hegemonic policies aimed at greater and more effective control of the Western Hemisphere. It is within this context – rationally coherent and firmly anchored in the historic geopolitics of the U.S. – that those remarks by Trump regarding Panama, Canada, and Greenland, which have been labeled as “gimmicks” or “outbursts” by the media, should be placed. His vision realistically implies a transition toward a multipolar world order, but with the U.S. striving to maintain and constantly seek a dominant position.
The reconfiguration of the world order – according to Trump’s intentions – will follow two main lines: using the influence of strengthened domestic manufacturing and national security on international dynamics and adapting foreign policy to limit the growing power of countries like China. Trump may seek to slow down the creation of a multipolar world by fostering strategic alliances with countries more aligned with U.S. interests, such as those in Eastern Europe, and pushing for a more confrontational stance with actors like Russia. His vision thus entails a strengthening of U.S. hegemony – anchored in the framework of “Manifest Destiny” – in conflict with globalization policies.
How might the Trump presidency impact U.S. leadership in NATO and relations with the European Union?
The Trump 2.0 presidency could accentuate his “America First” position, with U.S. leadership becoming less focused on NATO and the European Union. It is possible that Trump will continue raising the issue of NATO members’ financial contributions, criticizing European allies who fail to meet defense spending commitments. Relations with the European Union could remain tense, with an emphasis on economic policies favoring U.S. domestic industrial production at the expense of allies, particularly Germany and Italy, the two most important European manufacturing countries.
In this regard, the new Trump administration will employ a “carrot and stick” policy with its traditional European allies: among the coercive tools, tariffs will play a major role – essentially a lethal weapon for European countries. However, there may be attempts to strengthen ties with Eastern European countries, such as Poland and perhaps Hungary, in exchange for gradually abandoning the traditional approach to Central-Western Europe.
Identify the stakes of intensifying great power competition amid unpredictable U.S. leadership on the world stage.
The stakes in the intensifying competition between great powers are framed for Trump by the question: how to secure the U.S. a dominant position in the future global order?
If the Trump 2.0 presidency continues to pursue an “America First” policy, the U.S. will seek to maintain its global primacy, especially in the context of growing rivalry with China and the need to find a balance with Russia. In this scenario, international dynamics will be marked by increasing fragmentation, likely punctuated by a series of “crisis arcs” where tensions are higher or likely to rise, with a potential (and desired by Trump) slowdown in the multipolar process in favor of a new, more competitive world order, particularly oriented toward powers that better align with U.S. interests.
The challenge will be maintaining global leadership in an increasingly multipolar world, where the U.S. must navigate strategic alliances and economic and technological rivalries with other key actors. This challenge will particularly involve new space policy, which is likely to be a driving force behind renewed development of the domestic economic and industrial base, given the technological and industrial research implications of the space sector. Space policies will, moreover, represent the ground on which the world’s major powers will compete over the next decade.
In addition to Elon Musk, influential tech figures like Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos are interested in Trump’s vision. In this context, the development of a virtuous circle between civilian entrepreneurship and the military-industrial complex is not excluded – a synergy that characterized the U.S. success in the 20th-century space race and had a beneficial impact on the entire domestic economy. It is worth noting that during his first term (2017-2021), Trump promoted the creation of a new space defense force. During his campaign, he floated the idea of establishing a Space National Guard: another piece of his plan to reaffirm the U.S. in the international arena, on the dual and interconnected fronts of military and technological supremacy.