|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Edited by: TJVNews.com
As the world navigates an increasingly volatile geopolitical landscape, current and former advisers to President Elect Donald Trump anticipate that a second Trump presidency will emphasize deterrence and transactional relationships, both with rivals and allies. In a recently published report in The Wall Street Journal, advisers have expressed a belief that Trump’s approach will differ markedly from the Biden administration’s, which has not instilled sufficient fear or respect for U.S. power abroad. Trump’s team envisions a strategy rooted in “peace through strength,” with a specific focus on displaying America’s economic and military might to establish a clear, formidable stance that deters escalation in regions such as Ukraine and the Middle East.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Robert O’Brien, Trump’s former national security adviser, asserted that a renewed commitment to deterrence would be central to Trump’s foreign policy. O’Brien, who is speculated to assume a senior role when Trump returns to the White House, believes that Trump’s hardline approach will signal to adversaries that previous leniencies will not be repeated. “American adversaries understand that the things they’ve gotten away with over the last four years will not be tolerated any further,” O’Brien stated when speaking in the WSJ, thus reinforcing the Trump team’s view that a show of strength will curb aggressive actions by rival states.
However, implementing such a strategy faces significant obstacles. The Wall Street Journal report outlined the complexities introduced by an evolving alliance between Russia, Iran, North Korea, and a China that is rapidly expanding its military capabilities. The intricate web of support among these states—ranging from military collaboration to economic and diplomatic backing—complicates America’s approach. A former Trump White House official highlighted that addressing specific challenges, such as North Korea’s nuclear ambitions or Iran’s influence in the Middle East, was more straightforward during Trump’s first term. Today, however, issues are intertwined, making a holistic, interconnected approach essential. “We could have a discrete North Korea policy. We could have a discrete Iran policy. Now it’s got to be done much more holistically,” the official observed.
One key aspect of Trump’s foreign policy, as described in the report in The Wall Street Journal, will likely be an emphasis on personal diplomacy, particularly with leaders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin. While President Biden has not engaged directly with Putin since February 2022, Trump has signaled his intention to negotiate a settlement in Ukraine through direct talks. The Wall Street Journal report highlighted comments from retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, a former Trump administration official under consideration for a senior position. Kellogg underscored the potential benefits of personal relationships in defusing tensions within the anti-American axis. “A President Trump will reach out to key leaders to try and find a way to work through a problem,” he noted, pointing out that while stronger measures such as sanctions or military force remain on the table, Trump’s initial approach would prioritize diplomacy.
Trump’s second term could bring a major shake-up to America’s alliances, with trade and security dynamics also poised to change substantially. As The Wall Street Journal reported, Trump’s campaign rhetoric on tariffs, particularly toward Europe and Asia, has many speculating that he would impose new financial strains on longtime allies. Trump has frequently criticized trade arrangements that he sees as unfavorable to the U.S., pointing specifically to countries such as Germany, which maintains a significant trade surplus while benefiting from American military protection.
Jeremy Shapiro, director of the U.S. program at the European Council on Foreign Relations, offered insight into Trump’s stance, as documented in The Wall Street Journal. Shapiro explained that Trump views alliances as less of a mutual benefit and more of a burden. “He thinks they are rip-offs for the American public, and that allies are like relatives who come to your house to borrow money and then stay all day and use your pool,” Shapiro said. This transactional approach could redefine the U.S. role in alliances, shifting expectations for countries that have long relied on American economic and military support.
In anticipation of a potential pivot in U.S. foreign policy, European leaders are already bracing for a less predictable relationship. The Wall Street Journal report highlighted comments from French President Emmanuel Macron, who, speaking to European leaders in Budapest, cautioned against “naive trans-Atlanticism.” Macron pointed out that while Trump’s protection of American interests is legitimate, European countries must be prepared to defend their own interests with equal rigor. “The question is whether we are ready to defend the interests of Europeans. This is the only question,” Macron asserted, focusing on the need for European independence in the face of potential American retrenchment.
Reflecting on Trump’s first term, The Wall Street Journal report indicated that his administration struggled to persuade European countries to decouple from Chinese tech firms, such as Huawei, due to concerns about potential espionage. However, his concurrent trade war with Europe led some leaders to question Washington’s reliability as a partner, complicating these security discussions. Should European governments perceive Trump’s potential accommodation of Russia, especially in the context of the Ukraine conflict, as compromising their security, they may feel compelled to strengthen their ties with China—one of the world’s primary economic powers and a growing strategic influence in Europe.
Meanwhile, the report in The Wall Street Journal emphasized that U.S.-China relations will likely be a focal point in Trump’s second term. Trump’s team anticipates a continuation, if not escalation, of the hard-line approach that defined his first presidency and which the Biden administration largely maintained. According to former advisers, Trump’s grievances with China extend beyond economic competition. He is notably wary of Chinese leader Xi Jinping, whom he holds responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic and its profound global consequences, which he believes contributed to his 2020 election loss. The former president’s frustrations have only deepened following reports of Chinese hacking attempts targeting his 2024 campaign.
In contrast to his initial attempts to engage diplomatically with Xi, The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump’s posture toward China has significantly hardened. He will likely approach negotiations with a high degree of skepticism, unwilling to take Xi’s commitments “at face value,” according to a former Trump administration official. This evolution in Trump’s view of Xi and China’s ambitions could lead to a renewed trade war, further investment in U.S. military readiness in the Pacific, and a reinforced commitment to countering Chinese influence on the world stage.
As Trump’s second term approaches, The Wall Street Journal outlined a scenario in which America’s allies may find themselves reevaluating their own international priorities. A Trump administration that views alliances as transactional, rather than strategic, could prompt European and Asian allies to consider alternative partnerships, potentially with China, should the need for economic or security assurances arise. At the same time, Trump’s uncompromising stance toward China suggests an era of heightened U.S.-China rivalry, with a focus on trade, security, and technological dominance. If Trump’s proposed policies come to fruition, the global order could be entering a period marked by increased competition and realigned alliances.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) cautioned that any mishandling of relations with European allies could inadvertently strengthen China’s global position. “The Chinese have been waiting for it and preparing for it, and we are better off challenging China’s technological advances and intended dominance in partnership with our allies,” Coons emphasized, suggesting that collaboration with Europe is vital in countering China’s ambitions.
Trump’s prior administration was characterized by a desire to reduce America’s direct military involvement overseas, a policy that remains largely unchanged. Current conflicts in regions such as Europe and the Middle East have not necessitated American boots on the ground, yet this does not mean that Trump would remain passive. As The Wall Street Journal reported, Trump’s advisers suggest that a second term could see him pursue a greater role in international diplomacy, positioning himself as a mediator in conflicts where he believes he could broker peace.
“He wants to insert the U.S. into every conflict in the world to mediate, to bring about diplomatic solutions,” a former Trump White House official explained. This approach could see Trump acting as a “broker for peace” on a global scale, often involving himself in disputes, regardless of their proximity to U.S. interests. One notable instance from Trump’s first term saw him offering to mediate a complex dispute between Ethiopia and Egypt over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, demonstrating his tendency to involve himself in conflicts beyond typical U.S. strategic focus.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Trump’s unpredictability is regarded by his supporters as a diplomatic asset, contrasting sharply with what they see as Biden’s more predictable approach. They argue that Biden’s January 2022 comments on a potential “minor incursion” by Russia into Ukraine signaled a lack of resolve that may have emboldened Putin to launch a full-scale invasion. Trump’s supporters argue that he more effectively communicated clear threats, leaving rival leaders uncertain about the full extent of the U.S. response, which they contend played a role in maintaining deterrence. “Deterrence requires clearly communicating threats to your adversaries, and Trump did that, love it or hate it,” said Matthew Kroenig, vice president of the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council.
One of Trump’s most prominent foreign policy goals is the resolution of the war in Ukraine. While he has not elaborated on his exact approach, his advisers have suggested a strategy that would “freeze” the conflict, solidifying Russia’s control over approximately 20% of Ukrainian territory and persuading Kyiv to abandon its pursuit of NATO membership. This proposal is contentious, as Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly seeks to expand control over Ukraine and assert influence over its government, a move that may conflict with Trump’s intentions. Robert O’Brien, a former national security adviser under Trump, affirmed that Trump is committed to ending the bloodshed in Ukraine. “How he goes about that diplomatically, we will see how that plays out. But the president has been very clear that the killing should stop,” O’Brien stated, according to The Wall Street Journal.
A second Trump term would likely bring a tougher stance on Iran, particularly concerning its nuclear aspirations. The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump’s advisers envision a revival of his “maximum pressure” campaign, a policy that defined his initial tenure and included rigorous sanctions. Trump’s team argues that a strong hand is necessary as Iran continues to advance toward potential nuclear capability, positioning this policy as a cornerstone of a broader Middle East strategy.
In a startling development just ahead of the presidential election, the U.S. Department of Justice revealed that the FBI thwarted an Iranian plot to assassinate Trump. The case, involving a Pakistani man with alleged ties to Iran, highlights the intensifying tensions between Tehran and Washington as Trump prepares for a second term. According to The Wall Street Journal, despite this serious threat on his life, Trump remains open to diplomatic engagement with Iran. However, his former advisers have indicated that any negotiations will come with a high price for Tehran. “Maybe you shouldn’t have tried to kill him,” one former official pointedly remarked, signaling the strong position Trump will likely take at the negotiating table.
In line with his longstanding stance against “endless wars,” both Trump and his running mate, Senator JD Vance, oppose outright military conflict with Iran. Nevertheless, those close to Trump stress that he would not hesitate to act if Iran attempts to develop nuclear weapons. Trump’s vision for reducing American military involvement abroad includes the potential withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria and Iraq, where they have faced frequent attacks from Iranian-backed proxies.
Andrew Tabler, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and former Trump White House adviser, stated that Trump’s approach in the region will involve a combination of diplomacy, sanctions, and “a credible threat of military force” to achieve his goals. “Trump’s approach will be much, much stronger, and that should be no surprise to anybody,” Tabler told The Wall Street Journal, highlighting a policy direction likely to draw on both economic pressure and strategic deterrence.
Central to Trump’s Middle East agenda is the potential expansion of the Abraham Accords, a series of agreements brokered by his first administration that normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states. Trump’s advisers have suggested that he will pursue a diplomatic breakthrough with Saudi Arabia, a key regional player whose inclusion in the accords would mark a major victory in Trump’s foreign policy portfolio. Unlike the Biden administration, which discouraged Israeli attacks on Iran’s nuclear and energy infrastructure, Trump had taken a more permissive approach, famously telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “do what you have to do” regarding Iranian threats.
The complexities of Trump’s relationship with Netanyahu add an additional layer to U.S.-Israel relations. Although Trump and Netanyahu have reconciled after a fallout over Netanyahu’s acknowledgment of Biden’s 2020 win, The Wall Street Journal reported that lingering resentment remains. These tensions may influence Trump’s stance on Israel’s military actions in the region, particularly in Gaza and Lebanon. While Trump might support Israeli actions to counter Iranian threats, his administration could apply pressure on Netanyahu to scale down operations that result in significant civilian casualties, especially as Trump works to appeal to a broad array of domestic constituencies.
Trump’s outreach to Muslim and Arab American voters has been another focal point of his recent campaign. He notably won over many in heavily Arab-American communities such as Dearborn, Michigan, where voters were reportedly appalled by the humanitarian toll in Gaza. Trump’s ability to attract these voters has given him a unique political advantage, as he would face limited backlash from Congress if he opts to pressure Netanyahu to de-escalate in the region. This stands in contrast to Biden, who encountered criticism from progressives and foreign-policy advocates over his handling of the Gaza crisis.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Trump’s foreign policy toward Iran is anticipated to be a layered one, combining diplomacy with the reinstatement of his “maximum pressure” campaign, which had defined his first administration’s stance on Iran. By leveraging sanctions, strategic alliances, and potential military threats, Trump’s administration aims to dissuade Tehran from advancing its nuclear ambitions. The advisors speculate that Trump’s return to the White House could see a reinvigorated effort to isolate Iran economically and diplomatically, while also reinforcing America’s partnerships with key regional actors such as Israel and potentially Saudi Arabia.
The report outlined Trump’s approach to Iran as an aggressive, multi-faceted policy. His administration would employ sanctions, diplomacy, and alliances to curb Iran’s influence, while exploring peace accords that reshape alliances in the Middle East. Yet, Trump’s unique diplomatic style—marked by directness and a willingness to apply pressure—signals that his approach to Iran will differ significantly from that of the Biden administration, potentially realigning regional and global alliances in the process.
