In a month that has seen the capture of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and the potential annexation of Greenland, despair is very much the prevailing zeitgeist within Western diplomatic circles.
“Look upon my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!”
In a month that has seen the capture of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and the potential annexation of Greenland, despair is very much the prevailing zeitgeist within Western diplomatic circles. But perhaps, at long last, this common despondency is beginning the painful stirrings of realignment.
Canada’s Mark Carney has led the way, returning from Beijing with both economic concessions and the symbolic victory of a leader unyielding in the face of its southern neighbour’s belligerence. Keir Starmer is likely to follow suit, albeit more measured in both tone and policy, as his four-day visit is welcomed by a China keen to prove itself as the world’s stable superpower. Such engagement by stalwarts of the Western alliance is sure to draw ire from within the Oval Office, but will the lack of deference finally draw a shift in American foreign policy. History tells us otherwise.
There is no shortage of examples of leaders, kings, statesmen whose inevitable demise catalysed a sense of urgency. Be it through declining health or constitutional limits, the ephemerality of power is something every leader must face. There comes a point where both democratically elected leaders and despots alike shift their focus from simply prolonging their reign, to cementing their legacy.
For Henry VIII, increasingly infirm from an ulcerated jousting wound, this meant a final successful but ultimately insignificant invasion of France, driven by the lustre of repeating Henry V’s Arthurian heroics at Agincourt. Likewise, the casus belli behind Putin’s “special operation” in Ukraine was framed as a divine undertaking, securing the epithet he has long sought after: Vladimir the Great.
Against this backdrop, Trump’s current predicament is not unique. With Polymarket predicting just a 20% chance of Trump’s Republicans holding onto the House of Representatives come November, it would appear he has all but nine months until he is kneecapped to lame duck status.
Trump will know this. And whilst he continues to be domestically beleaguered by both the cost of living and his association with Jeffrey Epstein, foreign policy offers the perfect opportunity for distraction and quick wins.
This has been epitomised by the frenetic nature of his tariff policy, where last summer the EU was kowtowed into accepting a baseline 15% tariff on its exported goods, providing Trump the headline victory he so desired. However, submission has not been universal, with China’s nimble response of restricting critical mineral exports blindsiding the President, forcing an ungraceful climbdown and a diversion of attention elsewhere.
What’s more, there are signs that the novelty of Trump’s strategic unpredictability is beginning to wear off. Even the EU, whose procedural sluggishness has often been a vulnerability, was able to coordinate a united front to ward off Trump’s latest jab for territorial expansion. It’s become clear that if you show strength, and for long enough, Trump eventually moves on.
Trump’s impermanence isn’t a secret beholden to himself. World leaders alike will be monitoring not only the midterm elections, but also the imminent Supreme Court ruling on the legality of Trump’s imposition of tariffs without congressional approval. Should this ruling go against Trump, one of his greatest negotiating weapons would be severely blunted. Whilst this may embolden foreign leaders to extend their resistance, it would be foolish to think that a neutered Trump would accept any form of reluctant idleness.
With his two presidential impeachments and 34 felony convictions, Trump is no stranger to being stymied by the judicial system. In fact, it is often when facing institutional containment that Trump becomes his most brazen, spinning narratives and reasserting his authority as a decisive commander-in-chief.
With hindsight it was no coincidence that during his first term the killing of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani took place just days before the Senate trial on his impeachment. Or, that last June he chose to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities in the aftermath of the No Kings protests. Each incident provided not only political cover, but aroused the entrenched rally-round-the-flag feeling that allowed him to ostracise his opponents as unpatriotic.
As we look forward, strategic analysts must be vigilant, and repel any myopic complacency induced by judicial orders or the ballot box that seemingly hinder Trump. Historical precedent shows us that these next 9 months are likely to be as turbulent and kinetic as the ones that came before, if not more. And it will be through foreign policy that Trump vents whether he feels emboldened or encircled. For Trump these can mean one and the same.
“Nothing besides remains”