International Affairs

Key Countries / Regions

Politics, Institutions, and Public Opinion

Confronting and Competing with China

Determining America's Role in the World

A popular critique of Trump’s foreign policy over his two administrations is that it has been supposedly conducted with too much uncertainty, if not chaos. This spring and summer, Trump announced that we were at war with Iran, then reengaged in negotiations, then at war, and then negotiating again—through seven such iterations.

As a result, some MAGA apostates have accused Trump of fighting a “forever” or “endless” war against Iran, while the Left worries that America has lost its likeability in the eyes of sophisticated Europeans.

Critics further complain that whatever positive developments have occurred abroad on the president’s watch have mostly been negated by his off-putting messaging—interpreted by the international community, we are told, as mostly chaotic, mercurial, and incoherent tweets and rants that alienate allies and turn neutrals into belligerents.

Another objection is that Trump seems to become distracted or to tire in the midst of using force abroad. And such interruptions do not ensure a final denouement favorable to the United States even after impressive initial actions. In addition, his confidence in his private and public success “art of the deal” negotiating skills may have sometimes blinded him that certain theocratic or totalitarian regimes—Iran in particular—believe that deal-making is simply a ruse for delay and obfuscation if not a sign of weakness. Many regimes such as North Korea and Iran have no intention of honoring any agreements they might conclude, at least to their agreed-on fulfilment.

Yet many of these domestic criticisms imagine that Trump’s communications are failed attempts at being persuasive rather than calibrated tactics focused on obtaining what America needs. So they sometimes misunderstand and ignore what may be intended as Trump’s art-of-the-deal style—a stratagem that can often leave adversaries more confused and prone to error and miscalculation than true or traditional diplomacy. Consequently, Trump’s foreign policy cannot be judged by his off-putting rhetoric or his bruised critics’ outrage, but only by what has actually transpired in the nearly six years of his governance.

Moreover, Trump’s foreign policy is predicated on a realist assumption that nations gravitate toward perceived strength, but keep distant from hesitant or weak leadership. To that end, a chauvinist Trump hammers home the message of an American $31 trillion economy, the greatest oil and gas production of any nation in history, preeminence in space exploration, satellite launches, and artificial intelligence, record foreign investment, and, despite the uncertainty of the Iran war, a solid economy characterized by a record Wall Street, low unemployment, strong non-government job growth, and inflation—even with high gas prices—still much lower than the 5 percent average yearly inflation rate of the Biden years.

Just as importantly, Trump believes that an administration that risks controversial measures to remedy long-standing domestic crises—10 million illegal entries during the prior administration, a military short of thousands of recruits, a nihilist war on fossil fuels, a crime-ridden Washington DC, and a weaponized bureaucracy and administrative state—radiates confidence abroad. Certainly, the rise of pro-American governments in Latin America and conservative political parties in Europe owes much to the perceived momentum, daring, and the successes of Trump’s counterrevolution.

But the best method of evaluating Trump’s foreign policy is to assess why the world abroad bears little resemblance to the one of 2017 when he first entered the presidency. As a footnote, we might first remember that earlier, purportedly more sober and judicious administrations oversaw a twenty-year misadventure in Afghanistan, the most humiliating and costly theater retreat in a half-century from Kabul, a multibillion-dollar weapons gift to the Taliban, a decade-long ground war in Iraq, nine-months of incoherent and inconsequential bombing of Libyan factions, three separate Russian invasions of neighboring nations—Georgia, Ukraine, Crimea—orchestrated by Vladimir Putin, an embarrassing Chinese diplomatic putdown in Anchorage, Alaska, the worst single-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust during the October 7, 2023 invasion of Israel by Hamas terrorists, and an unchecked and seemingly unstoppably ascendant China that threatened Taiwan, the American-built Panama Canal, and American interest in Latin America.

In contrast, Trump’s approaches to foreign relations over two terms have led to both the long-term benefit of American interests and allies and to the detriment of American enemies. For example, Trump quickly eliminated enemies such as ISIS in Iraq (Obama’s “JV team”) and a contingent of the........

© Hoover Institution