Donald Trump will be inaugurated as the 47th President of the United States on January 20, 2025. His victory represents a historic achievement, as the Republican candidate won exceptionally in both the electoral and popular votes. What also makes Trump’s victory unique is that he is accused of 34 criminal offenses and faces trials in other cases before state and federal courts. The United States has never before elected a person facing criminal charges to its highest office.
Trump’s Influence:
Since 1987, several books attributing insights to Trump have been published, all of which center on Trump himself. Although these works lack a specific ideological theory or conceptual framework for Trump’s thinking, it can be inferred that he strongly believes that everything has a price. Throughout his first term as President of the United States, Trump, according to his own account, heavily relied on television and commercial media as primary sources of information about global and local events, rather than relying on historical sources, scientific materials, or confirmed official data. His former staff members have repeatedly emphasized his changing and volatile nature, making him a continuous target for those seeking to sway him.
Understanding Trump’s thought processes is invaluable, as his decisions as President will have significant domestic and international repercussions. His critics among American and European Democrats strongly accuse him of undermining the international rules-based order they claim to promote. Ironically, the double standards of these critics have often been more severe and impactful than Trump’s fiery rhetoric. Notably, Trump’s repeated assertions and nominations suggest that in a second term, he will strive to implement his beliefs while giving little attention to views from within or outside his party.
I truly believe Trump has the opportunity to shape the future of international relations. The question remains whether his influence will have catastrophic consequences or historically positive outcomes. As a second-term president, Trump will undoubtedly leave a substantial mark through his successes and failures, as well as through what he chooses or chooses not to do. For example, his “America First” policy will significantly affect global geopolitical dynamics, and his implementation of economic tariffs on both friends and foes will have dangerous implications for the free-market system and the international institutions long promoted by the West. Trump’s stance on climate change threatens already fragile efforts aimed at achieving global consensus on the issue. Additionally, two urgent matters— the conflict in Ukraine and the Middle East— will have particular impacts on Trump’s plans and policies.
An Unconventional Approach:
From a holistic perspective, Trump’s approach to international affairs can be characterized by several key points. On one hand, it can be said that Trump prioritizes economic aspects, such as economic return and cost, rather than focusing on the political or strategic dimensions associated with geography. This approach is coupled with an isolationist “America First” policy, characterized by restricted global military engagement. Consequently, Trump’s approach can be described as short-term and transactional by nature. On the other hand, Trump’s style in international relations is marked by pragmatic deal-making, which emphasizes the concept of winners and losers rather than ethical considerations of right and wrong.
Trump is not a warmonger; rather, he advocates for deals. In the realm of international relations, this approach is often equated with diplomacy; however, Trump’s style is highly personal, relying on individual connections rather than institutional diplomacy to achieve objectives. While this approach is preferred over excessive use of force, its weakness lies in Trump’s tendency to cynically and blatantly favor the strong and the powerful at the expense of others’ rights.
Expectations Regarding the Ukraine War:
Regarding Ukraine, Trump’s national security advisor nominee, Mike Waltz, recently wrote that “fighting as a protracted war of attrition against a larger power is a recipe for failure.” Some close to Trump believe that aid to Ukraine should be conditional upon Kiev initiating peace talks with Russia, suggesting negotiations based on the current front lines. Additionally, they propose delaying Ukraine’s NATO membership, which Kiev is very eager to pursue.
There are widespread comments regarding the need for Kiev to temper its expectations regarding the withdrawal of Russia from territories it controls in eastern Ukraine. Trump’s approach to this issue seems to focus on ensuring Ukraine’s security rather than preserving its territorial integrity. Trump has been explicit in his opinion that NATO members have not fulfilled their responsibilities adequately within the alliance, causing significant concern among members about how this impacts NATO’s supposed deterrent effectiveness against hostile leaders. In light of these developments, it is noteworthy that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz made a lengthy phone call with Russian President Putin on November 15.
Position on the Middle East:
In addition to claiming he would end the Ukraine war in a day, Trump has also promised to bring peace to the Middle East. Trump, who strongly aligns with Israeli policies, has not previously engaged in dialogue with Palestinian leadership, although he maintains strong relationships with several Arab leaders. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not officially endorse a two-state solution, even under the terms of Trump’s deal. Following the tragedies in Gaza, signing an agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel will be a challenging goal, as the kingdom has explicitly stated that establishing an independent Palestinian state is a prerequisite for peace with Israel.
Trump has already expressed his desire to end violence in Gaza and Lebanon before his official inauguration. However, achieving this, though an important priority for the incoming U.S. administration, will require balanced and careful work. This balance must include the Israeli right, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, Iran, Saudi Arabia, as well as Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and other actors in the region whose national interests are at risk.
The current situation presents a model that is either all or nothing, raising the question of whether Trump will seek to reach a “grand deal” and a complete closure of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or whether he will choose to focus on limited achievements aimed at ending hostilities while presenting them as “grand deals.” The new American president’s interest in making a deal could be intriguing, and if successful, it would be historic; however, Trump’s inclination to overlook values of right and wrong in favor of wealth and power may come at a significant cost to the rights of Palestinians and Arabs as the occupied parties.
In conclusion, based on Trump’s past practices in the Middle East and his statements regarding Ukraine, it can be expected that what is called the “Second Deal of the Century” he proposes will encompass a much smaller area of land than that of Gaza and the West Bank; this aligns with Israel’s refusal to establish an independent sovereign Palestinian state, enabling Israel to control large parts of the West Bank. At the same time, creating a symbolic Palestinian state might encourage Arab nations to assist in managing Gaza’s affairs and facilitate relations with Israel in the region.
If Trump succeeds in ending conflicts and bringing legitimate peace to both Ukraine and the Arab-Israeli conflict, he will have effectively used diplomacy as the most effective tool for conflict resolution. Conversely, if his unconventional efforts, which prioritize power balances at the expense of legitimate rights, fail, he risks undermining the principles of international law that govern regional disputes and national conflicts. Such a scenario could have dire consequences for the global order and international relations for generations to come. Only time will tell which scenario will come to pass.
