When Mike Waltz was unexpectedly relieved of his duties as national security advisor to President Donald Trump and reassigned to the role of US ambassador to the United Nations (UN) on May 1, it brought to light the taffy pull between so-called nationalists and isolationists in Trump’s inner circle. The conflict reportedly reached critical mass over the issue of Iran, with advisers on both sides believing their foreign policy beliefs were more faithful to the president’s America First agenda. The nationalists were apparently counseling Trump to engage heavily in direct negotiations with the regime in Tehran, aimed at eliminating its nuclear capabilities. The isolationists preferred to avoid engagement and let the nations of the Middle East figure it out for themselves.
So, when it comes to Trump – who spent Tuesday (May 13) at business summits in Saudi Arabia, the first of three destinations on his initial foreign trip since reassuming office – which philosophy best describes his foreign policy? In his first term, he famously became the first president of the 21st century to keep the United States out of new foreign conflicts. Was it because he chose to isolate the country from the evils of the world around us, or was it the result of a worldview based on the notion that America’s exceptionalism by itself projects overwhelming power, rendering direct military action as inadvisable or unnecessary? Actually, the answer is neither.
Trump and Peace Through Strength
The most apt comparison for Trump’s view of America’s role in the world is with Ronald Reagan’s philosophy of peace through strength. By building our military, already the most powerful in the world, into an even more impenetrable force, while holding the threat of the so-called Star Wars Strategic Defense Initiative over the Soviet Union, Reagan was able to win the Cold War without firing a shot (though the USSR and Iron Curtain of Eastern Europe ultimately crumbled shortly after he left office). Likewise, even in the cost-cutting frenzy of DOGE and his commitment to scale back the federal budget, Trump is calling for a substantial increase – 13% – in the defense budget.
At the same time, as demonstrated on his Middle East journey, which continues to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and with his pact with Ukraine on rare earth minerals, Trump is unique in his focus on diplomacy through commerce. As the first businessman to win the presidency, Trump has consistently employed the principles outlined in his book The Art of the Deal to forge colossal international deals that invariably create strengthened bonds with our allies – and sometimes our adversaries.
An integral part of the dealmaking Trump lays out in his seminal book is not to seek zero-sum agreements in which one party wins and the other loses, but to forge plus-sum deals that benefit both parties, as happened in his agreement with Ukraine. It is based on the principle that a deal that brings one party low ultimately becomes unsustainable. Exhibit A would be the Treaty of Versailles, signed at the conclusion of World War I. Germans were up in arms, believing it was a raw deal, and the resulting widespread outrage led to the rise of Adolf Hitler, whose promise to avenge Versailles led to World War II and the deaths of millions around the world.
Trump set out to attract trillions of dollars in foreign investments in the United States, and he has so far been extremely successful. That is what his trip to visit allies in the Middle East is all about. When the US economy is bolstered by massive infusions of capital, it becomes a plus-sum game in which both sides stand to prosper.
So, perhaps we might label Trump’s foreign policy as Peace Through Commerce.
Another tenet of Trump’s worldview is to engage with our enemies, as Richard Nixon did with China and Reagan did with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. Trump is actively negotiating with Iran and famously did so in his first term with “Little Rocket Man” Kim Jong Un of North Korea. While many are wary of what he describes as a friendly relationship with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Trump is careful not to poke that bear. While its economy is reeling, factories emptying, thousands of jobs in its manufacturing and export economy lost, Trump could, as some have openly advised, administer something akin to a fatal blow to China by persisting with massive tariffs that could well lead to military retaliation. Instead, by most accounts, he used the threat of such tariffs to forge a plus-sum deal that would benefit both nations.
Remember the old saying about keeping your friends close and your enemies closer?
The Art of Leverage
Trump long ago concluded that the United States had refused to employ the leverage it enjoyed over the rest of the world. After complaining about it for decades, he came to power fully prepared to use that leverage to level the playing field. The idea is quite simple: One must capitalize on the advantages one holds in negotiation – whether in business, domestic politics, or world affairs – but not at the cost of burying the other side.
You may have noticed during his “Liberation Day” proclamation that Trump, consistent with his win-win philosophy, did not condemn the countries on which he was applying stiff tariffs. He said he understands why every country wants the best deal possible, but that the United States has been consistently on the losing side of a grossly uneven, zero-sum playing field for decades. Unlike his predecessors, with the exception of Reagan, he has shown a bold willingness to use every ounce of leverage to keep the United States at the top of the heap. At the same time, he has encouraged other countries to follow the same strategy of putting their people first, instead of bowing to a global order forged after World War II in which countries are compelled to compromise their sovereignty for the sake of world peace.
Another tenet of Trump’s worldview is, as with domestic policy and consistent with his modus operandi in the business world, Trump prefers to consider many informed and conflicting viewpoints instead of surrounding himself with yes-men in an amen chorus on foreign policy. He is not wedded to a single ideology, preferring pragmatism and realism. With many on the right and left outraged that he would even consider allowing Russia to maintain control of conquered regions of Ukraine in a prospective peace deal, Trump has apparently – and rightly – concluded that if he demands a return of such territory to Ukraine, there will never be a deal to end the war. While Putin’s evil is a settled issue, Trump is primarily concerned with stopping a war that has cost more than a million lives. Trump refused to condemn Putin before drawing him into negotiations, and the Russian president is now set to meet with the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Thursday, May 15. Likewise, Trump would never do what Joe Biden did shortly after taking office, condemning Saudi Arabia as a “pariah” and thus closing a door that had long been open with a key ally. Trump has now kicked that door open again with his trip to Saudi Arabia.
So, perhaps we might label Trump’s philosophy as Peace Through Pragmatism.
Energy Dominance
The president’s stated commitment to energy dominance instead of energy independence will certainly benefit Americans, lowering costs and increasing supplies in the heavily energy-dependent American economy. But he also knows that the best way for the United States to pull back from involvement in the most explosive area of the planet, the Middle East, is to no longer rely on oil from that region. Dependence on foreign oil and the whims of autocratic rulers is hardly a formula for true independence – thus, Trump’s insistence that the United States make and consume products here rather than depend on unstable and unreliable foreign governments. For example, do we want to continue importing one-third of our prescription drugs, two-thirds of computers, and $15 billion in medical supplies from China?
Some presidents are easy to define when it comes to foreign policy. Biden was a longtime war hawk, an interventionist who almost always supported US involvement in foreign conflicts, as when he said he would continue to prop up Ukraine “for as long as it takes.” He ignored the reality that the war has devolved into a standoff while thousands are killed every week. That was also the case with President George W. Bush, who initiated wars in Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11 and kept up the fighting for the remainder of his eight-year presidency, much to the consternation of most Americans. Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton were what we might call cautious hawks, whose direct involvement in wars was limited to strikes in which Americans were not placed directly in harm’s way.
But when it comes to Trump, whether you label his worldview as peace through strength, peace through commerce, or peace through pragmatism, he is forging a composite philosophy different from his many predecessors. If his massive business deals, ubiquitous negotiations with allies and adversaries alike, and realistic view of world conflict succeed as they did in his first administration, Americans seem likely to again buy what he is selling.
