Abstract
Please note at the outset that the cut-off date for incidents and analysis relating to both parts of this two-part paper was March 31, 2026.
This examination consists of two parts. The first assesses Donald Trump’s understanding of foreign policy fundamentals. In contrast, the second evaluates his management of US foreign relations under the America First strategy. It covers various international issues, including tariffs, sanctions and relations with entities like the EU, Russia, China and Iran. The analysis is grounded in a comprehensive literature review of US international relations during Trump’s presidency and employs analytical frameworks to understand the implications of his policies. It also considers the roles of Congress and the Supreme Court, highlighting the complexities and challenges of the USA’s diplomatic strategies.
Since Trump began his second term in January 2025, his America First foreign policy has prompted a significant transformation in the USA’s global position, as the US relinquishes conventional obligations to pursue its immediate self-interest. The extensive system of alliances, treaties and foreign assistance initiatives established by the US after the Second World War is undergoing significant modification or outright elimination. Since January the US has reduced humanitarian and development aid by tens of billions of dollars, withdrawn from significant agreements such as the Paris climate accord, and limited reporting on human rights violations. Entire government agencies have been depleted. A more personalised approach prevails, largely contingent on the caprices of Donald Trump, whose foreign policy embodies a more severe, parsimonious and unforgiving stance.
He criticised the USA’s European allies as “freeloaders” and “delinquents”, yet achieved what his predecessors could not by compelling them to increase their defence expenditure. He started by following a more robust programme. Two profound grievances informed his perspective. The first concern was that the USA was maintaining international rules and alliances at the expense of regular residents, who financed the nation’s foreign engagements through taxes and sacrificed their children in its conflicts. The second point was that the USA was being economically exploited. This notion, mostly dismissed by economists, posits that the USA was adversely affected by importing far more than it exported. In pursuing his foreign policy goals, Trump focuses on swift agreements similar to corporate acquisitions, and prioritising homeland security and immigration concerns. These initiatives often occur without Congressional input, relying heavily on trusted advisors while sidelining career diplomats.
Trump views trade agreements as economic advantages that boost the stock market and benefit Americans, although some may take years to affect living costs. His administration argues that traditional diplomacy hinders effectiveness, and advocates a streamlined approach that allows direct presidential engagement with foreign leaders, bypassing bureaucratic constraints. In this process, Secretary of State Marco Rubio plays a key role. Trump’s unequivocal departure from conventional diplomacy is a salient characteristic of his foreign policy. He prioritises national interests and employs disruptive tactics, resulting in judgments that pose enduring challenges to the USA’s international stature.
By the conclusion of his second term’s inaugural year some of his actions have already proved to be irrevocable, making a return to the previous state in Washington improbable. 2025 was marked by global changes, with Trump as the central figure. From tariffs and the trade war to efforts at mediation in numerous global disputes he has been ubiquitous in newspaper headlines and in the considerations of foreign leaders navigating a markedly different White House during a tumultuous period. His methodology of foreign relations can be encapsulated as follows: He perceives the world from a commercial perspective.
The National Security Strategy of 2025 outlines Trump’s assertive global agenda. It aims for the USA to dominate in Latin America and Asia, while focusing less on Europe. Rejecting isolationism, Trump reshapes internationalism to align with his ideals, utilising personal diplomacy and expanding executive powers. His approach raises concerns about undermining post-World War II multilateral frameworks, putting international stability and collaboration at risk. Trump’s unconventional, unilateral tactics, including a contentious trade war, have garnered significant authority, with Congress ceding power to the presidency. Scholars warn of potential adverse effects on global diplomacy, as Trump’s legacy may persist beyond his presidency, influencing future executive authority and international relations. Conventional Republican politicians hesitate to support alternative ideas due to fears of right-wing backlash, leading to their potential irrelevance and defeat in upcoming elections.
By March 2026, Trump had already issued over 400 executive orders, bypassing Congress and challenging its spending authority. His focus on international relations, including trade agreements and stances against countries like Venezuela, aims to enhance his legacy but detracts from domestic issues. A Quinnipiac survey shows mixed approval for his foreign policy, with 54% disapproving. Strategists believe the economy will be a more significant factor in the 2026 mid-term elections than Trump’s foreign policy effectiveness will be. His actions have already made him a prominent figure in global affairs and are reshaping the USA’s role on the world stage. Foreign leaders have begun adopting a different approach toward Trump to navigate a new diplomatic landscape. Trump’s foreign policy treats international relations as deal‑making in which economic leverage is the primary instrument of power, a logic that makes geoeconomics central to US strategy. Economic and financial instruments are deployed not as adjuncts to diplomacy, but as core tools to secure prosperity for the USA and shape the strategic environment. Geoeconomics, understood as the purposeful use of economic instruments to achieve geopolitical goals, aligns with Trump’s organising principle that economic security is national security which in turn is vital to protecting and enhancing the national interests of the USA. The result is a foreign policy in which alliances, regional deals, and even conflict management are evaluated by their contribution to growth, jobs and industrial capacity.
Consequently, by elevating geoeconomic competition, Trump’s transactional approach reinforces the USA’s economic security. His America First foreign policy operationalises a distinctly transactional logic in which economic statecraft serves as the primary currency of influence, thereby recasting traditional security and alliance politics as ongoing negotiations over material advantage and burden‑sharing. By following this approach, his policies aim to constrain strategic rivals and re‑embed the USA’s prosperity at the core of a more contingent, deal‑driven international order.
Keywords: America First; Arab states; Congress; Democrats; diplomacy; European Union; executive orders; foreign aid; foreign policy; Israel; MAGA; national interests; national security strategy; NATO; Republicans; Marco Rubio; Supreme Court; transactional; Donald Trump
- This article’s featured image was created by Jean Soumet-Dutertre and obtained from Pexels.