Get audio access with any FP subscription.

Subscribe Now

ALREADY AN FP SUBSCRIBER? LOGIN

Ongoing reports and analysis

According to an emerging conventional wisdom, U.S. President Donald Trump is seeking to work with autocratic great powers to carve up the world into “spheres of influence.” For example, Anne Applebaum writes, “That vision, of a world divided into three spheres of influence, run by three great powers … influences some in the Trump administration.” A headline in Time magazine warns of “Trump and the Dangers of Spheres of Influence.”

Even social media influencers seem drawn to this idea, with a widely circulating  online map showing the world divided into three, with equal parts going to Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

According to an emerging conventional wisdom, U.S. President Donald Trump is seeking to work with autocratic great powers to carve up the world into “spheres of influence.” For example, Anne Applebaum writes, “That vision, of a world divided into three spheres of influence, run by three great powers … influences some in the Trump administration.” A headline in Time magazine warns of “Trump and the Dangers of Spheres of Influence.”

Even social media influencers seem drawn to this idea, with a widely circulating  online map showing the world divided into three, with equal parts going to Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

But is this the right way to think about Trump’s foreign policy?

To be sure, Trump wants an American sphere of influence in the Western Hemisphere. But he is also fiercely competitive, and he is unwilling to grant similar dominions to Putin and Xi. In this way, he is more like traditional American presidents, advancing American security close to home while also working to prevent adversaries from dominating important geopolitical regions.

As Stephen Walt correctly argues, a sphere of influence can be understood in both a........

© Foreign Policy