As his second term unfolds, Donald Trump has upended many aspects of the US government, including its foreign policy. Brian Alexander writes that by upsetting and creating uncertainties for long-term alliance partners and allies, Trump is undoing America’s foreign policy accomplishments. Trump’s dealings with Russia and threats to leave important international institutions, are not only misguided, but dangerous for national and global security.

The early days of the Trump administration have seen a flood of policy changes and executive actions likely to prove unparalleled in American history. The number of executive orders is exceeding all those of his predecessors at the same stage of their presidencies. The scope of agencies and individuals impacted is vast. The strategy to “flood the zone” is intended, by design, to overwhelm the capacity of the government and media systems and opponents alike to respond. Many of these actions are untested, others are possibly illegal, and some potentially unconstitutional.

Like it or not, we all are living in a Trumpian experiment where a vaccine skeptic is put in charge of Health and Human Services, essential government experts are summarily fired (then rehired), and the president unilaterally claims unprecedented executive powers. In the months and years ahead, Americans will learn if they are great again because of these bold moves. Meantime, uncertainty abounds among an anxious public.

Undoing America’s foreign policy successes

One area, however, where there should be little doubt that Donald Trump is making America worse off is in foreign policy. In a shocking sweep of actions, the Trump administration has abandoned commitments to allies, rewarded Russian aggression, surrendered American moral authority, and adopted a transactional approach to foreign relations. Such shifts in policy do not just endanger previous important successes in US foreign affairs, they contradict hard-fought wisdom and experience gained through decades of international relations theory and practice.

By upsetting upset longstanding alliances and antagonizing allies in the Americas and Europe, Trump violates the principle of the security dilemma, where a state that in attempting to increase its own security, decreases the security of others. Countries rely upon predictable behavior in a threatening world to determine the risks to their security. When they no can no longer trust allies or they see adversaries emboldened, self-preservation dictates that they undertake defensive and possibly offensive moves, misperception and miscalculation occurs, and conflict is more likely.

In creating uncertainty over its commitments to its allies, the US is forcing even hesitant nations to take militaristic steps to ensure their own security. This is exactly what we are seeing in the European response to Trump’s wavering support for NATO. If US-driven uncertainty persists, a rearmament of Germany, for instance, becomes a concern not only because of the resurgent right, but because of the security dilemma. Left to fend for itself, a re-militarized Europe may cause new power imbalances, real and perceived threats, and raises risks akin to those that led to two world wars.

Upsetting the existing world order

What’s more, the US should not upset the applecart of the existing world order, especially when it is primarily a US creation which strongly reflects American interests and values. Certainly, conditions are changing and the US has to adjust to the rise of rival worldviews and powers, especially China. Yet, neoliberal institutions such as the World Trade Organization, the United Nations, NATO, and others, have mitigated international conflict, enhanced global cooperation, and increased prosperity, all to the advantage of the United States. For a presidential administration to willfully undermine this global system is an unforced error of colossal proportions.

Additionally, Trump’s tactics are ill-suited to the long game of foreign policy. Favoring transactional power blocks, such as in his dealings with Russia, over loyalty to friends might provide the US immediate benefits. But the multiple interactions of the world stage require trust and predictability if they are to provide benefits. This is a basic axiom of game theory and a long-held component of international security strategy. Simply put, when recently betrayed friends are needed to help tackle future challenges in international affairs, the US could be left to fend for itself.

“President Trump & the First Lady’s Trip” (Public Domain) by The Trump White House Archived

No theory of international relations is perfect or without debate and controversy. And US foreign policy has not always been strategically successful nor morally consistent. Yet, whatever shortcomings exist among longstanding approaches to global affairs, none of them warrant the United States abandoning a secure, dominant world position for untested, destabilizing policies that weaken allies and make adversaries stronger.

Alarm bells over Trump’s turn to Russia

Turning again to Trump’s shocking pivot toward Putin on Ukraine, whatever the theoretical and policy errors of this approach, the American psyche should be reeling. This is Russia we are talking about. Historically, it is almost as American as apple pie to stand up to Russia, from the demagogic days of the Red Scare, to Ronald Reagan’s “evil empire” speech and Drago the Soviet boxer from Rocky IV, to the post-Cold War commitments of NATO. Cognitive dissonance alone should sound red alarms now that a US president is cozying up to a Russian dictator. (Will any remaining Republicans with courage please stand up?)

In a world of 12,000 nuclear weapons, climate change, a rising China and territorially aggressive Russia, and a growing population of eight billion people, it is perilous to alienate allies, abandon hard-earned wisdom, and give up on a world order where American values set the standard for global progress. Trump’s approach is not only theoretically misguided, but also a danger to national security and world peace.

• Subscribe to LSE USAPP’s email newsletter to receive a weekly article roundup.
• Please read our comments policy before commenting. 
• Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of USAPP – American Politics and Policy, nor the London School of Economics. 
• Shortened URL for this post: https://wp.me/p3I2YF-f1g