Trump's Transactionalism Undermines Post-WWII International Order

The United States' "America First" doctrine, as articulated by Donald Trump, represents a fundamental dismantling of the post-World War II international order, not through a grand, coherent strategy, but through a series of transactional, often impulsive demands that disregard long-standing alliances and principles. This conversation reveals the hidden consequences of this approach: a destabilized global landscape where traditional notions of diplomacy and shared security are replaced by a zero-sum game, potentially empowering illiberal actors and leaving allies bewildered and vulnerable. This analysis is crucial for policymakers, international relations scholars, and anyone seeking to understand the seismic shifts in global power dynamics, offering a clearer lens on the erosion of established norms and the emergent, often chaotic, new world order.

The Hammer and the Albatross: Trump's Transactional Worldview

The discourse surrounding Donald Trump's approach to international relations, particularly his overtures towards Greenland and his broader stance on alliances, highlights a profound departure from established diplomatic norms. Instead of engaging with allies based on shared values and mutual security, Trump operates on a transactional basis, viewing international relations as a series of deals to be won. This is exemplified by the Commerce Secretary's self-description as "the hammer," a metaphor that underscores a penchant for forceful, often aggressive, negotiation tactics. The immediate consequence of this approach is confusion and alienation among allies, who are accustomed to a more predictable and collaborative framework.

Adam Tooze observes the bewildered atmosphere at Davos, where the overarching concern is Trump's unpredictable actions, epitomized by the Greenland gambit. This isn't merely a diplomatic faux pas; it signals a willingness to disregard established sovereignty and historical alliances for perceived immediate gains. Ivan Krastev points out a critical distinction in European reactions: Western Europeans are shocked by the unfamiliarity of Trump's actions, while Eastern Europeans, having experienced historical upheavals, are fearful because they recognize the disruptive potential of such a revolutionary, albeit unmanaged, approach. This revolutionary momentum, Krastev argues, "is running you," leading to radicalization and an inability to control the forces unleashed.

The core of this transactionalism lies in the constant renegotiation of terms, a strategy that undermines the very foundation of treaties and alliances. As Jon Stewart notes, Trump's willingness to discard previously negotiated tariff levels with the EU illustrates this pattern. This isn't just about economic leverage; it's about establishing a precedent that no agreement is permanent, and compliance is a constant requirement. Krastev likens this to "serial abusive relationships," where promises of reconciliation follow aggressive actions, creating a cycle of dependency and eroding trust. This dynamic is particularly dangerous because, as Tooze suggests, Trump has been "taught that there is nothing he can do that makes people walk away and not give him what he wants."

"The whole forum is overshadowed by by by greenland and and well just trump and generally... this really comes home here and we're just waiting as a series of build ups for trump's promised arrival tomorrow afternoon."

-- Adam Tooze

The Paradox of Weakness: Europe's Unforeseen Resilience

Trump's strategy appears predicated on the belief that Europe is weak and will inevitably capitulate. However, Krastev identifies a crucial paradox: Europe's current weakness, particularly its internal divisions, paradoxically compels a more unified response when faced with external pressure on fundamental issues like sovereignty. The Greenland proposal, while seemingly absurd, forces European nations to confront their own societal structures and their collective identity.

Krastev argues that Trump "totally misread Europe" by assuming its weakness would lead to easy concessions. Instead, the issue of land and territory, particularly for Eastern European nations with a strong sense of history and national identity, becomes a point of resistance. Unlike issues of migration or economic policy, which might align with some far-right nationalist sentiments, the outright claim on sovereign territory triggers a different, more fundamental reaction. This is why, Krastev notes, "his allies are silent" on the Greenland issue, a stark contrast to potential support on other matters.

The European Parliament's reaction to the trade deal, and its subsequent solidarity with Denmark and Greenland, illustrates this emergent unity. Nationalistic MPs, including those aligned with Orban, stood up in support of Denmark, indicating that Trump's transactional approach, devoid of historical or future considerations, fails to resonate with a classical nationalist ethos. Krastev emphasizes that Trump, unlike traditional nationalists, "is not interested in history... he's not interested in future," making him difficult to engage with through conventional diplomatic or contractual means. This lack of a future-oriented perspective, Krastev posits, is a key reason for the difficulty in forging lasting agreements.

"He said that europe is weak and this is true but europe is so weak that we cannot cave up."

-- Ivan Krastev

The Specter of Demographic Anxiety and the Erosion of Liberal Democracy

A significant undercurrent in the conversation is the role of demographic anxiety and a perceived fear of "woke" ideology as a driving force behind the shift in global politics. Stewart posits that the new polarity is not democracy versus authoritarianism, but "woke and not woke." Krastev refines this, linking it to demographic fears and declining fertility rates, where "gay man and the gay woman are much more the symbol of why we do not have kids." This fear of decline, of becoming "the last man," fuels a narrative of societal decay and a yearning for strongman leadership.

Tooze adds that the organizing principle for this brand of conservatism, particularly within the Trump coalition, stems from a backlash against civil rights and immigration. This isn't necessarily a direct hostility to democracy itself, but a hostility to its liberal interpretations and the inhibiting norms of the rule of law. The implication is that once the "citizenry" is redefined to exclude certain groups, the resulting electorate will consistently favor their preferred politics. This leads to a concerning trend where governments, rather than reflecting the will of the people, seek to "elect new people," as Brecht famously quipped, by manipulating demographics and citizenship.

The pursuit of Greenland, a territory with vast resources but few people, becomes symbolic of this broader anxiety. It represents an escape from a world perceived as "unlivable," particularly for those in power. This fear of demographic change and the potential loss of majority status fuels a desire to control territory and resources, not through collaboration, but through direct acquisition. The conversation highlights how this anxiety can manifest as a hostility towards democratic processes when those processes threaten to empower groups deemed "other."

"The problem is about you can't share labor market what you are not going to share is power and this understanding of democracy where citizenship goes with ethnicity with race with things like this this is his changing."

-- Ivan Krastev

Key Action Items: Navigating the New World Disorder

• Immediate Action (Next Quarter):

  • Diversify Information Sources: Actively seek out news and analysis from a broad spectrum of global outlets to counter the echo chambers that Trump's rhetoric exploits. Utilize tools like Ground News to understand media bias.
  • Strengthen Bilateral Ties: European nations should proactively reinforce their diplomatic channels and present a united front on core sovereignty issues, as demonstrated by the solidarity with Denmark.
  • Invest in Public Discourse: Engage in open and honest conversations about the value of international cooperation and democratic norms, countering narratives that frame global engagement as a zero-sum game.

• Medium-Term Investment (6-18 Months):

  • Develop Strategic Resilience Frameworks: European institutions and individual nations should develop robust frameworks for responding to economic coercion and political pressure, moving beyond reactive measures.
  • Promote Civic Education on Global Systems: Educate citizens on the historical development and benefits of the post-WWII international order, emphasizing its role in fostering peace and prosperity, even with its imperfections.
  • Support Independent Journalism: Recognize that a free and robust press is a bulwark against authoritarianism and misinformation. Support organizations that uphold journalistic integrity.

• Long-Term Investment (18+ Months):

  • Rebuild Trust in Democratic Institutions: Focus on reforms that address internal inequalities and restore faith in the ability of democratic governments to serve all citizens, thereby inoculating societies against populist appeals based on grievance.
  • Foster a Forward-Looking Vision: Cultivate a shared narrative of a positive and achievable future, emphasizing innovation, sustainability, and shared progress, to counter the fear-based politics that thrive on a sense of decline.
  • Cultivate Global Cooperation on Existential Threats: Pivot from transactional power plays to collaborative efforts on shared challenges like climate change and technological disruption, demonstrating the tangible benefits of international cooperation.