How a second Trump presidency could reshape US foreign policy strategy

Last month’s assassination attempt on former US President Donald Trump has sent shockwaves through American politics, sparking widespread controversy.

Already performing well in polls, Trump’s standing has further improved, especially following the recent presidential TV debate, garnering support even among independent voters, according to an opinion by Anadolu as reported by Caliber.Az.

With many signs now pointing to a potential Trump presidency, despite President Joe Biden's surprising withdrawal in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris, questions have emerged about what a second Trump term might mean for US foreign policy.

Trump’s approach to foreign policy is rooted in a highly transactional view, akin to business negotiations where deals are made based on profitability. He sees the use of force not as a means to transform other nations but as a punitive measure to safeguard US interests. Trump believes the US should only intervene when its core interests are directly threatened, favoring a demonstrative use of power to bolster US credibility on the global stage.

This perspective aligns with what can be described as "isolationist unilateralism," where Trump views alliances with skepticism, often perceiving them as burdens unless partners contribute their "fair share." If re-elected, Trump would likely operate with fewer constraints from Republican elites and the US foreign policy establishment, leading to a more cohesive team that reflects his views on international relations.

Structurally, the global balance of power provides the US with significant autonomy, as neither Russia nor China poses immediate challenges to American dominance. This environment grants Trump the freedom to choose whether to reduce or increase US engagement in global affairs, a decision driven by his own preferences rather than external pressures.

In terms of active and potential conflict zones, Trump’s foreign policy would likely focus on three key areas: Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan. He has criticized the ongoing US aid to Ukraine and suggested that the war might have been avoided under his leadership. While a complete policy overhaul may not be feasible, renegotiation could be on the table. In Gaza, Trump may view the region as a test of US resolve, particularly in supporting Israel, with whom he has historically had a strong relationship. Regarding China, while his rhetoric remains adversarial, he may opt for a more cautious approach on Taiwan, signaling a potential reduction in US commitment in the event of a geopolitical crisis.

In summary, a second Trump presidency would likely be characterized by a blend of isolationist unilateralism, transactional diplomacy, and a readiness to use force when deemed necessary to protect US interests. Understanding how Trump views the world, combined with the current global power structure, is crucial to anticipating the direction of US foreign policy under his potential leadership.