Trump’s America First Doctrine: Rethinking U.S. Alliances, Power, and Global Strategy
By treating alliances as business deals and international norms as disposable, the U.S. risks eroding the very foundation of the global order that has long served its interests. Critics warn this creates a leadership vacuum that rivals like China and Russia are eager to fill, leaving America increasingly isolated and less secure.
The first modern thinker, Thomas Hobbes, suggested the creation of an all-powerful state, which he likened to Leviathan, a sea monster. He believed that there lies in human “a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death”. This creates chaos and a “war of all against all”. The state, according to him, curbs these human urges and ensures law and order in society.
However, when the insatiable human hunger for power manifests itself in the institution of the state, it gives rise to an anarchic international system where survival and self-help are the norms. But unlike humans, a state’s pursuit of power does not cease with its death. Even though the state may be viewed as a power maximalist in some realist interpretations, such as those of offensive realists, power must not be the end for the state but should serve as a means to achieve its ultimate goal, which lies in the protection and advancement of national interests.
However, in recent decades, American foreign policy has seemingly lost sight of clearly defined objectives and national interests. Since 1991, when the so-called history ended and the US ran out of adversaries, it has entered wars without clear national objectives and has continued fighting them just because it could. The Global War on Terror is a classic example where the US fought (and arguably lost) a two-decade war that cost it 2.3 trillion dollars and the deaths of 2,324 U.S. military personnel, while the goal post for the US kept shifting from fighting terrorism to carrying out nation-building in Afghanistan.
Also Read: PM Modi in Japan: A New Chapter in India-Japan Strategic and Economic Ties
Trump has brought disruption to this style of US foreign policy, which was increasingly losing its connection with the American people. He wants the US to exercise and project its hegemonic power in the world for the benefit of America and the Americans, or in his words, ‘Make America Great Again’. The Trumpian U-turn from globalisation and the building up of tariff walls around the big, beautiful land of America are aimed at reserving the fruits of American resources and labour for the American people, whom the US foreign policy should ideally serve.
The fact that the US is a great power means that its political, economic, and military capabilities extend beyond its borders. It emerged from the Second World War not only unscathed, but also as the only country capable of single-handedly weaving the world into a new world order. All the major global governance and financial institutions were born in US cities, conceptualised on norms proposed by the US, and headquartered there. The dollar became the global currency, and the US military expanded its presence and influence worldwide. These were all the tools at the disposal of the American empire, which was still in the making. While the US successfully shaped the global environment for its sustained growth, its leaders seemed to forget that America’s global political, economic, and military dominance was supposed to be a tool of influence forged through power (as a means) exhibited during the two world wars, to serve American interests (ends).
Today, when Trump pulls away from these institutions, he does so because he no longer sees them as serving American interests. Many elites in Washington’s power circles share this sentiment. Trump and his loyalists view post-World War II multilateral institutions as captured by China and functioning as agencies of Chinese interests. His predecessors had allowed this in the hope that China would evolve into a democratic polity and a free market economy. That vision never materialised, and in the process, the US lost control over the very institutions it had created. As a result, the US is increasingly becoming disenchanted with the multilateral order and is purposefully dealing with nations, big or small, bilaterally to extract maximum profits for itself.
Also Read: Rethinking Global Education Trends
Trump’s America-first worldview is not concerned with the abstract goal of global leadership, but with tangible and achievable gains for the American nation. The ultimate aim is not to lead the world but to build internal capacities by enhancing manufacturing, onshoring jobs, and rebalancing trade deficits. He wants the US military to protect the American people, the US industries and tech giants to thrive and foreign businesses to manufacture in America and create jobs for Americans. For achieving this end, he is deploying high tariffs as a tool to force companies (both American and foreign) to shift production to America.
Trump believes the US has the technological edge, infrastructure, and institutions needed to drive the future growth of a “Great America.” Although concerns have been raised regarding the availability of talent, especially for high-tech industries, which will be further restricted by his policies on immigration. Still, the Trump administration is hedging its bet on the manufacturing sector to produce not only American goods and services but also American talent. Similar patterns have been witnessed in Europe in the 19th century, in America and Japan during the 20th century, and in China in the early 21st century.
Trump is also willing to capitalise on the vast strategic energy reserves that America has long been sitting on and is proposing mechanisms to gain from them. This can be seen in his famous call to ‘drill baby drill’ to boost energy production, despite obstacles created by potential climate-change concerns. He is also targeting foreign countries, many of which did little for their own security under the ambit of the American security umbrella, to pay for security guarantees in cash or kind or both. In the Trumpian approach, power is used as a lever to reclaim American dominance in technology, trade, and talent. In this worldview, the normative concepts such as alliances, institutions, and agreements are not seen as sacrosanct but as renegotiable contracts that should benefit America in a practical sense.
This shift from treating power as an end to using it as a means has profoundly reshaped America’s role in the world. To supporters, it is a long-overdue correction that reasserts national sovereignty and prioritises the well-being of its own citizens over abstract internationalist goals. They see it as a pragmatic approach that uses America’s unparalleled strength to secure its interests in a competitive world.
To critics, this transactional approach is dangerously short-sighted. They argue that by treating alliances as business deals and international norms as disposable, it erodes the very foundation of the global order that has served U.S. interests for generations. Critics contend that this creates a vacuum of leadership that rivals like China and Russia are eager to fill, ultimately leaving America more isolated and less secure.
Regardless of one’s perspective, it is clear that the “America First” doctrine has forced a national and global debate on the fundamental purpose of American power. It marks a departure from the idea that America’s primary role is to act as the world’s indispensable nation and instead posits that its power should be used unapologetically as a tool to achieve a narrowly defined, domestic-focused vision of national greatness. Herein lies the perfect synergy between the domestic and the foreign policy, both of which should serve as a tool for national greatness, aka Make America Great Again (MAGA).
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the authors solely. TheRise.co.in neither endorses nor is responsible for them. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.
About the author
Akash Kumar is researcher working at the intersection of Science Technology and International Relations with a focus on critical and emerging technology. He is currently pursuing his PhD in Science Policy Studies from School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University working on India's semiconductor diplomacy.
Radhika Gupta is a researcher working on Canada's foreign and domestic policies with a focus on Arctic security. She is currently pursuing her PhD in Canadian Studies from the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University where she keenly tracks geopolitical developments in the North American continent.
Nice read
Well argued…US needs to bring back manufacturing to its shores to compete with China