President Trump’s second term prioritizes ending conflicts, not resolving their root causes.
President Trump’s return to the White House, while generating significant media attention, is not unexpected. His characteristic dynamism is familiar, yet the public response differs from his first term. Initially perceived as an anomaly, his rise was attributed to factors like alleged Russian interference. Trump himself appeared surprised by his win.
This time, his return is calculated. He projects an air of inevitability, supported by a unified Republican party and an establishment that has adapted to his influence. With Congressional control and a loyal team, he can implement his agenda with minimal opposition over the next two years. His rhetoric is now more likely to translate into policy.
Trump’s ideology has remained consistent. Statements from the 1980s reveal core beliefs that persist today. His ultimate aim is American supremacy, but not the liberal global leadership of previous administrations. His version emphasizes transactional, utilitarian approaches. Alliances and institutions are valuable only if they provide tangible benefits to the US; otherwise, they are discarded.
Trump’s America prioritizes maximizing returns in all interactions—economic, security, and political. If negotiations fail, coercion is employed.
Prioritizing economic warfare over armed conflict
While favoring a strong, assertive approach, Trump is averse to military conflict, not from pacifism, but pragmatism. He views war as unproductive, contrary to his preference for building and acquiring assets. Negotiation, mergers, or acquisitions are preferred over destruction.
This explains his preference for economic warfare. Trade wars and aggressive negotiations are his tools, often targeting allies rather than adversaries. This unsettles traditional partners and challenges the post-Cold War international system, where alliances are valued for collective stability. Trump sees no inherent value in these alliances unless they benefit the US.
US-Russia Relations under Trump
Trump’s return presents mixed prospects for Russia. His rejection of the liberal world order signals a break from the ideological rigidity of previous administrations. The post-Cold War system often overlooked Russia’s interests in favor of US dominance. Trump’s “America First” policy focuses on national interests, potentially facilitating pragmatic, mutually beneficial agreements.
However, Trump’s approach is flawed. He avoids addressing conflict root causes. In Ukraine, for instance, he seeks a simple cessation of hostilities, not a comprehensive resolution. A ceasefire along existing lines would suffice, leaving deeper security issues for others to resolve. This is insufficient for Russia, which wants a long-term solution addressing European security imbalances, a concern Trump is unlikely to prioritize.
Trump’s dislike of complex international agreements further complicates matters. He prefers straightforward deals, as demonstrated by the Abraham Accords, which sidestepped historical disputes for pragmatic, economically-driven solutions. Applying this to Ukraine is unrealistic; the conflict’s deep historical and geopolitical roots demand nuance and patience which Trump lacks.
Transactional Governance
Trump’s transactional leadership extends to his view of governance. He assesses governments based on efficiency and alignment with US interests. Leaders who reject his advice or fail to meet his standards are deemed incompetent. While less ideologically driven than previous administrations, this still results in the US dictating terms, often disregarding national sovereignty.
This highlights a continuity in American foreign policy: the belief that the US defines the legitimate interests of other nations. Trump may abandon ideological justifications, but the US-centric worldview remains.
A New Global Political Landscape
Trump’s return signifies a new era in global politics. His presidency is not an anomaly but reflects broader sociopolitical shifts. The old model of global leadership, exemplified by Biden’s presidency, is waning. Trump’s disruptive approach, while prioritizing national interests, exacerbates contradictions and risks confusion.
For Russia, Trump’s pragmatism presents both opportunities and challenges. While his disregard for liberal ideology aligns with Moscow’s views, his lack of interest in systemic issues limits meaningful collaboration. His focus on short-term gains and tendency to dictate terms could lead to friction, even while aiming to avoid direct confrontation.
Trump’s presidency reflects the logic of a changing world order. As traditional alliances and institutions weaken, new dynamics driven by national interests and pragmatism emerge. Whether this leads to stability or tension remains uncertain. What is clear is the end of “global leadership” as we knew it, with Trump as its most visible symbol.
This article was first published by the newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team