Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
President Donald Trump raises a fist during a ceremony where he signs two executive orders that will lead to reciprocal tariffs against other countries that charge tariffs on US goods.
Is Donald Trump’s foreign policy … working?
What’s the old line about there being decades where nothing happens and weeks where decades happen?
Quoting Vladimir Lenin may not be the wisest move in today’s America, but it’s an apt description of the (second) first 100 days of Donald Trump’s foreign policy.
In barely three months, he’s bashed America’s closest European allies, spooked NATO into worrying about its survival, taken a chainsaw to US foreign aid programs, pulled the rug out from under Ukraine, threatened to expand US territory for the first time since the 19th century, and started a global trade war that’s pushed protectionism to its highest levels since the Great Depression.
Not bad for 100 days! But is there a method to what seems – to horrified defenders of the “US-led world order” – like so much madness? “Method” is a risky word to use with a figure as famously capricious as Trump, but there are a few basic aspects of his worldview and commitment to “America First” that are consistent and worth understanding.
No new friends (also no old friends)
First, Trump believes that the world is a place where all countries are just trying to “screw” each other. This is true not only of adversaries but, especially, of allies. (Tell me you’re a New York real estate developer without telling me you’re a New York real estate developer.)
The mutual screwing occurs in an endless chain of zero-sum transactions between countries in which hard power and cold cash are all that matters. Deficits or defense umbrellas are ripoffs. Alliances based on “values” are silly. Soft power is a useless conceit, a virtue signal, a kind of “Geopolitical wokism.”
It’s a (multipolar) jungle out there
Second, there are various great powers in this world, and each has its own sphere of influence. The largest of these are the US and its chief rival China, but Russia is up there as well. You do not, in Trump’s view, mess with another power’s sphere of influence, and you do not waste time trying to win over countries of marginal economic or strategic value beyond your neighborhood. You put your country, to borrow a phrase Trump uses a lot, “first.”
Once you grasp that, for Trump, the world is a transactional and increasingly multipolar jungle, it actually explains a lot about his foreign policy.
It tells you why he doesn’t seem to care that much about Ukraine (he sees it as Russia’s sphere) or Taiwan (ditto for China) or why he’s OK slashing foreign aid (soft power is silly). It explains why he wants a piece of Greenland, Canada, and the Panama Canal (all have immense strategic and economic value within Washington’s own sphere of influence, especially if conflict is coming with other powers.) And of course, it tells you why he loves to love tariffs – a crude but effective tool for unleashing America’s immense economic power
Hard power dreams, soft power missteps
All of this is a big rupture with the longstanding idea that the US, as a hegemon, gets more than it gives by providing security, market access, or development assistance to vast parts of the world.
But taken on its own terms, is Trump’s foreign policy ... working? The evidence is mixed. Many of his objectives – restore America’s lost manufacturing capacity, confront China, and force Europe to carry its share of the defense burden – can make sense on their own. But, taken together, the overall policy is still a mess of conflicting impulses.
Trump wants to isolate and pressure China, but he’s simultaneously wrecking relations with Europe, Washington’s most natural ally against Beijing. He wants to maintain technological supremacy over China, but his immigration and education policies are scaring the world’s best minds away from America.
He wants to use tariffs to restore manufacturing – which, by definition, almost requires leaving them in place for a long time. But he also wants to use them to extract tactical concessions on trade and defense – which means not leaving them in place for a long time. Which is it?
And while he is right to force the West to confront the problems of Biden’s well-intentioned but poorly defined Ukraine policy, his pledge to end the war “within 24 hours” is already 2,376 hours overdue. Browbeating Ukraine while pleading with Vladimir Putin on social media is not exactly a foreign policy to be reckoned with.
It’s still early days to be sure. But whether the decades that have happened in these 100 days are a real revolution against the long-established order of US foreign policy, or a a tangle of disruptive but ultimately confused impulses remains to be seen.
Trump’s Empire State of Mind
Donald Trump has an empire state of mind.
From his threats to make Canada the 51st state, buy Greenland, reclaim the Panama Canal, and, almost implausibly, “take” the Gaza Strip, Trump isn’t hiding his imperial ambitions. In his inaugural address, he explicitly said he sees an America that “expands its territory.” Is he serious about this, and, if so, what does it mean for its closest neighbor and biggest partner, Canada?
Let’s start with the first question: Is territorial expansion a real threat or just rhetoric he is using to shake down opponents in trade negotiations? It’s both. Trump is using these threats to gain better access to markets for American goods, and he’s flexing his imperial desires.
No moment better illustrated Trump’s empire state of mind than on Tuesday, when he met King Abdullah II of Jordan at the White House. With Trump’s radical promise to take Gaza and “clean out that whole thing ” — choice words not lost on anyone remotely familiar with the worst crimes under international law — the meeting was expected to be about as uncomfortable for the royal as a crown of porcupine quills. But it got even more interesting than expected.
The president was asked how he would buy Gaza, as he had initially proposed. “We’re not going to have to buy,” he said. “We’re going to have Gaza. We don’t have to buy. There’s nothing to buy. We will have Gaza.”
We will have Gaza.
Pause there for a moment because that was a foundational shift in US policy. The president of the United States declared he could unilaterally pluck up pieces of land the US has no legitimate claim over in blatant violation of international law. Because the statement was so shocking, Trump was immediately asked to clarify. You won’t even buy it?
TRUMP: No reason to buy. There is nothing to buy. It’s Gaza. It’s a war-torn area. We’re going to take it. We’re going to hold it. We’re going to cherish it.
We are going to “take” it.
The next moment was the one that Canadians, Greenlanders, and Panamanians took to heart.
The king was visibly uncomfortable with what he and every Arab leader have said is a totally unacceptable idea, so he tried to deflect a confrontation, saying the Arab leaders would propose a solution, but then Trump doubled down.
“Mr. President,” a journalist asked, “take it under what authority? It is sovereign territory.”
“Under the US authority,” the president answered, as if that was enough.
This is exactly the law of the jungle we described in Eurasia Group’s 2025 Top Risks Report, where international laws and norms — the same laws and norms the US built and underpinned after World War II — are no longer enforced. Under this rule, strong countries — the United States, China, and Russia — divvy up the world into their own imperial spheres of influence. In a cogent piece this week in the Financial Times, Gideon Rachmancalled this the age of neo-imperialism, a world “based around spheres of influence — with the US concentrating on the Western Hemisphere, Russia on Eastern Europe, and China on East Asia.”
It is exactly right. This week, Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin had a long phone call during which – without input from Ukraine – they appeared to unilaterally decide the terms on which the war, which Russia started, would end. On favorable terms for Russia. How do we know? Because US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the same day while he was in Europe that Ukraine joining NATO is now off the table and that US support for Ukraine and European defense is a low priority. Putin must be popping vodka bottle tops. His war aims have been largely vindicated.
More importantly, it shores up Rachman’s thesis that Trump is reverting to the imperial spheres of influence model, where great powers gobble up land in their orbits and let other great powers, like Russia and China, do it in theirs. The empire state of mind in action.
How should Canada read this?
On his way to the Super Bowl, Trump was asked by Fox News’ Bret Baier whether taking over Canada is a real goal. “Yes it is,” Trump responded before sharing his rationale that Canada, in his view, is a leech on the American economy and military and that he believes it should be the 51st state. So, yes, he is serious about it.
Again, not to be a scold, but facts should matter here. On that day, Trump’s rationale for taking over Canada was a “$200 billion” deficit. That is wrong. According to Stats Canada, in 2023, the trade deficit was $94 billion, which includes the cheap energy Canada supplies. But to the empire state of mind, facts don’t matter. Neither does the rationale. Today, it could be about trade deficits, fentanyl, and illegal immigration, and tomorrow, it could be about banking or cars. The goalposts will shift. All that matters is what the US wants to “take.” The rest is pretext and commentary.
So how could Trump take Canada by “economic force”? Again, the president is not hiding his plan.
Step one: Weaken the Canadian economy with devastating tariffs.
The 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum will be punishing for Ontario and Quebec but not existential. That is just a start. Layer another 25% tariff on all Canadian goods crossing the border, and there will be a meltdown.
“If we stop allowing them to make cars — through tariffs and other things: cars, trucks, etc., what they make — they’re not viable as a country,” Trump told Baier in a chilling moment.
Step two: Sow divisions in Canada. By excluding energy from his threats — or by putting much lower tariffs on energy than on other goods – Trump heats up East-West tensions in Canada that have long been on a medium boil.
It also has the benefit of self-interest. The US needs Alberta energy for its Midwest refineries. Otherwise, voters there will see a price jump at the pumps. So, Trump cuts Alberta a break. The rest of Canada, meanwhile, will want to retaliate against his tariffs, and energy is a powerful weapon in the arsenal. The Alberta premier has said that is a no-go. Other leaders are not ruling it out. If – no, when – the tariffs come, the external threat of Trump will be strengthened by the internal disputes within Canada.
Step 3: Spread disinformation. Separatism has always been an issue between English-speaking provinces and French-speaking Quebec. The separatist PQ party has been steadily on the rise in Quebec, with the promise of a referendum in the near future. Fomenting that movement with more disinformation is not out of the question for a president who wants to swallow up Canada and take its minerals, water, and access to the Arctic.
These could add up to the “winning conditions” Trump needs. Does he start with an offer to let part of Canada split off and join the union? Maybe. Suddenly, Canada is in fragments and ready to be swallowed up, bite by bite.
Of course, this is all dark speculation. Annexing Canada is not just a matter of political barking any more than it was in the War of 1812, when taking Canada was supposed to be a mere matter of marching. It wasn’t then, and it won’t be today.
Former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper was roundly celebrated by leaders of all parties when he said, “I would be prepared to impoverish the country and not be annexed, if that was the option we’re facing.” Trump’s threats have led to a dramatic spike in Canadian patriotism. Canada is gearing up for a fight it doesn’t want or need. The US is picking a fight to win a prize it already has: free and fair trade with its best friend.
The empire state of mind, however, doesn’t allow for the logic of mutual benefit. It is a radical shift in global politics and a warning to countries that once called themselves allies, neighbors, and friends.