A few more days in Trump’s life  American diplomacy in an age of upheaval

It’s a bit late now to talk about the “first hundred days” of Trump and their results. On the other hand, the 47th President of the United States continues to act in such interesting ways that he constantly forces not only discussion about himself, but also a fresh retrospective reassessment of his record. This applies equally to all areas of the White House occupant’s activity — including diplomacy.

Trump’s diplomatic efforts, energetically launched by his team even before he officially took office, led to a deal between Israel and Hamas that facilitated the release of some Israeli hostages and thousands of Palestinian prisoners. However, this initiative had no real follow-up — nor could it — given the irreconcilable nature of the conflict.

Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, held a fourth round of indirect talks with Iran, the outcome of which once again revealed nothing—apart from the well-known fact that “they were difficult.” Washington has repeatedly shifted between toughening and softening its demands, leading observers to wonder whether the Americans have fallen into a Persian web—or, on the contrary, are playing some game known only to them.

The same can be said about the negotiations with Moscow and Kyiv regarding a resolution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Zelenskyy is trying to portray Putin as an unreliable partner and push Trump toward a path of arming Kyiv. Moscow, for its part, having secured from Washington a tacit acknowledgement of its interpretation of the conflict in Ukraine, is in no hurry to reciprocate with flexibility in concluding a ceasefire.

While the interests of these two sides are more or less clearly defined, Washington’s position once again fades into the fog of war. True, the Americans did sign a resource extraction deal with Kyiv. However, this agreement raises more questions than answers. Moreover, its implementation still requires peace — and that remains elusive for now.

The situation is further complicated by diverging assessments within the American president’s team. For example, Trump has spoken favourably about Putin’s statements regarding the Istanbul talks, while the U.S. special envoy for Ukraine,  Keith Kellogg, supported Zelenskyy’s proposal for a 30-day ceasefire and blamed Moscow for its unwillingness to end the war. Yet even Kellogg’s role appears somewhat ambiguous — despite his title, all negotiations on Ukraine are still being handled by Witkoff.

A fairly significant development related to Washington’s diplomatic mission is undoubtedly the achievement of a ceasefire between India and Pakistan. While the truce is occasionally disrupted by small-arms fire along the border, it has largely held. The peak of the escalation is behind them, and both sides are now speaking of the need to come to the negotiating table.

Recently, Trump arrived in Saudi Arabia for his first foreign trip since taking office in January. True to his tactic of first pleasing his counterpart and then dousing them with cold water, Trump, having honoured the country by making it the destination of his first official visit, demonstratively refused to touch the cup of coffee offered to him during a meeting. In doing so, Trump seemed to be signalling to the world that he is breaking with the established world order just as easily as he flouts the rules of protocol.

All of this may seem alarming, but haven’t we all loudly lamented that global politics is stuck in a rut and in dire need of a shake-up? Well, here it is—it has arrived. There are, however, some concerns that Trump’s tactic might become contagious among other actors in international politics. And what comes across as instinctive and organic when done by Trump could, in the hands of others, go disastrously wrong.