The war in Ukraine is leading to a seismic geopolitical shift, reshaping the global order. At its fulcrum stands Donald Trump, the champion of “America First” who is asserting Washington’s dominance on his own terms. Opposing him, Europe remains trapped in the inertia of its post-Cold War illusions, struggling to adjust to a world where American leadership is no longer benevolent but transactional, no longer collaborative but demanding. China patiently waits out the storm.
From the moment he re-entered the political arena, Trump made one thing clear: this time, there would be no hesitation. The bureaucratic constraints and internal divisions that diluted his first term are gone. He is now precise, ruthless, and unwavering. His administration is not a team of rivals but a cadre of loyalists, dedicated to executing his vision.
Ukraine: The Art of the Deal
On Ukraine, Trump rejects the moral absolutism that defines European rhetoric. While Brussels frames the war as an existential battle between democracy and tyranny, Trump noticed that much of Europe’s Ukraine funding was in the form of loans secured against Ukraine’s assets. Meanwhile, Europe was offsetting its Ukraine funding by increasing its natural gas trade with Russia. If the Europeans were in reality treating Ukraine not as a cause but as a strategic asset — then so would he. If Washington invests $24 billion per quarter into Kyiv’s war effort while Europe contributes only $15 billion, then Ukraine must reciprocate—not with abstract gratitude, but with tangible concessions in terms of resources and industrial deals.
For Trump, foreign policy is not about values; it is about leverage. He is uninterested in endless military entanglements that do not serve American interests. Under his leadership, the era in which Washington shouldered the burden of European security while Brussels dictated diplomatic terms is over. Trump’s America is not a guardian—it is a broker. And in this new order, Europe finds itself relegated from strategic partner to passive onlooker.
The growing tensions within the G7, the European Union’s paralysis in shaping global trade policy, and Brussels’ inability to steer Washington’s strategic decisions are not mere disruptions. They are the symptoms of a continent losing its geopolitical footing. The real question is not whether Europe will resist Trump’s reordering of the world—it is whether it can adapt before it becomes irrelevant.
The Middle East: Power and Peacemaking
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long been an intractable puzzle, shaped by decades of war, shifting alliances, and failed diplomacy. Yet, during his first term, Trump executed a masterstroke: the Abraham Accords. By normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab states, he proved that economic incentives could succeed where traditional peace talks had failed. His vision —spearheaded by Jared Kushner — was one of pragmatic statecraft, in which prosperity replaced ideology as the engine of stability.
Trump’s Middle East strategy was not traditional mediation. Rather, it aimed to redefine the dynamics of negotiation, breaking away from the long-standing patterns of unresolved balancing acts. By moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and leveraging transactional diplomacy, his approach signaled a shift — from a US focused on consensus-building to a US reshaping the region’s power structure on its own terms.
Trump understands that lasting stability requires more than ceasefires—it requires the dismantling of Hamas and the broader weakening of extremist networks. For him, rebuilding Gaza is not an act of humanitarian goodwill but a strategic maneuver. Reconstruction will come, but only under conditions that ensure that Hamas — and the ideology it represents — can never again wield influence.
Trump’s approach extends beyond military confrontation; it is a war against the climate of fear that stifles open discourse, even in the West. The reluctance of some governments to condemn the atrocities of October 7 reflects a paralysis imposed by radical ideologies. Trump’s response will not be mere condemnation; it will be executive actions — sanctions on terrorist organizations (some of which have political branches), financial networks, and individuals that materially support terrorism. His goal is not only to free populations from the grip of terror but to liberate governments from the constraints of political cowardice.
China: The Challenger
After eight years of adapting to Trump’s disruptive policies—by fortifying its domestic economy and strengthening alliances in the Global South—China believes it can weather another turbulent US presidency. But that confidence may be misplaced.
China’s economic foundations are increasingly fragile. Its overcapacity problem is forcing a surge in exports, triggering pushback across the world. Growth is slowing, and despite government intervention, a full-scale recovery is far from guaranteed—regardless of Washington’s actions. Yet, Beijing remains convinced that, even if its economy stumbles, four years of Trump will not push it into a full-blown crisis.
More importantly, Chinese leaders see Trump’s return as an opportunity. If he follows through on his threats — on trade decoupling or territorial disputes — he risks accelerating America’s geopolitical decline. Beijing’s long-term strategy is not solely about competing with Washington; it is about capitalizing on American missteps. Xi Jinping’s vision of China’s rise—often described as “changes unseen in a century” — relies on the assumption that US global leadership is eroding from within.
For China, the priority is not direct confrontation but endurance. Its strategy is to wait out the storm, absorb short-term economic pain and position itself for long-term geopolitical gains. In Beijing’s calculus, Trump may not be an obstacle to its rise — he may be the unwitting accelerant.
Trump’s World: A Test of Survival
Donald Trump does not merely wield power—he reshapes it, imposes it, and forces the world to adapt. Whether in Europe, Ukraine, the Middle East, or the broader global economy, his methodology remains the same: brute force, pragmatism, and a cold calculation of relative power balances.
If Europe wishes to remain relevant, it must abandon its illusions of multilateral equality and accept its new role in a world where America no longer leads by consensus.
If the Middle East seeks stability, it must embrace economic integration over perpetual conflict. If Ukraine wishes to survive, it must recognize that American aid will always come at a cost. And if China sees itself as the next superpower, it must prove that it can withstand the economic and strategic pressures of an unpredictable Trump presidency.
Trump does not govern in the traditional sense. The question is no longer whether the world can resist his vision. The question is how each nation will navigate its survival within it.
