Trump-proofing the world order

Trump season 2 is a sequel no U.S. allies are asking for

Photo by Library of Congress on Unsplash

Imagine a world where Donald Trump's return to the presidency isn't just a speculative story; it's a potential reality that has allies and adversaries alike scrambling for the remote, talking about how to "Trump-proof" the world before the credits roll.

Trump: Season 2 is the sequel no US allies have asked for. Now, the prospect is sending shivers down the spines of NATO members, who fear the final act in the drama of the transatlantic alliance will resemble a Michael Bay production: all explosions, no substance, and a plot that nobody can quite follow.

Trump’s cavalier remarks about letting Russia attack underperforming NATO nations have sparked fears of a U.S. retreat from its Article 5 commitments. European leaders, having tasted the bitter pill of Trump's disdain for multilateralism, have been already be operating with one eye on the rearview mirror, wary of the U.S.'s reliability as a partner.

Once hopeful for a Biden-led renaissance of the "America is back" era at the start of the war in Ukraine, they now face the haunting possibility of a U.S. that turns its back on allies to fend for themselves against the likes of Putin's Russia and an emboldened China.

Europe once again finds itself pondering whether to transform into a fortress of collective defense or risk becoming a collection of fiefdoms paying tribute to the whims of Trump's America. Haunted by the ghost of Trump past, the continent's leaders are dusting off their history books, realizing that appeasement didn't work in the 1930s and won't work now.

This isn't just about defense budgets; it's about the very fabric of collective security that has deterred aggression and maintained peace in Europe for over seven decades. As former U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul writes in his Substack

McFaul's World

, Trump doesn’t still understand what the alliance is about…which is dangerous:

“The probability of a Russian attack on a NATO ally goes way up if Putin calculates that the United States will not come to the aid of its European allies. Trump’s comments last week undermined our credible commitment to defend our NATO allies. And make no mistake, a conflict between a NATO member and Russia will eventually drag the United States into war, even if Trump is president, just as it happened in the run-up to World War II,” McFaul says.

These fears aren't contained to Europe. Trump's vision of the world—a place where alliances are transactional, foes are flattered, and strength is measured in social media followers—presents a stark challenge to the established order. His disdain for diplomatic norms and multilateralism has left America's global standing on "read," prompting both allies and adversaries to reassess their strategies in the event of the return to a Trumpian world.

Across the Pacific, the fear of "America First" translating to "Asia Alone" is also palpable. Allies like Japan and South Korea, pivotal in the strategic balance against China's rise, now face the unenviable task of navigating between the rock of U.S. unpredictability and the hard place of Chinese ambition. Their strategy involves a delicate dance of diplomatic flattery aimed at Trump's ego and a pragmatic bolstering of their own defenses, hoping to deter Chinese aggression without explicit U.S. backing.

In the Middle East, a region synonymous with volatility, the shadow of Trump's legacy looms large—from his maximalist stance on Iran to his unequivocal support for Netanyahu's Israel and blatant disregard for the welfare of Palestinians. Unpredictability is already the chief export to this region, and Trump's diplomatic style promises a return to chaos theory in action. The Middle East, no stranger to the art of survival, might find itself dusting off the playbook of non-alignment, with leaders stretching to maintain ties with Washington while simultaneously courting Beijing and Moscow.

At the heart of Trump's foreign policy lies a deep-seated isolationism that resonates with a significant portion of the American electorate. Yet, this inward-looking stance overlooks the essence of America's greatness—not derived from its ability to stand apart, but from its capacity to lead, collaborate, and galvanize collective action on the world's most pressing challenges.

As the world contemplates the potential impact of Trump's return, the temptation to "Trump-proof" the planet is understandable. This doesn't mean building walls (Trump has that covered) but reinforcing the foundations of international cooperation, strengthening alliances from within, and preparing for a future where American leadership is a variable, not a constant.

The true test will be whether these efforts can create a global order resilient enough to withstand the forces of Trumpism. In the end, "Trump-proofing" may be less about changing one man's policies and more about ensuring that the world can navigate the storms he creates, with or without America at the helm.