By: Radhar Tribaskoro – The BRAIN Institute
The victory of Donald Trump in the 2024 U.S. presidential election marks a significant shift in the country’s foreign policy. The United States appears to be transitioning into an era of multipolarism, where its singular dominance as a global leader is waning, with policies increasingly prioritizing domestic interests and pragmatic bilateral relationships. One of the most prominent indicators of this shift is America’s retreat from its traditional role in various global initiatives, including military operations, climate change agendas, poverty alleviation, and efforts to uphold democracy in developing nations.
Abandoning Global Leadership
Under Trump’s leadership, the United States has become more selective in its involvement in global conflicts. Trump shows little appetite for deploying U.S. troops into any conflict worldwide. Despite maintaining the world’s most powerful military, Washington has begun refraining from direct engagements in conflicts that do not provide immediate strategic benefits to national interests. The most striking example of this stance is America’s response to the conflict in Ukraine. Instead of directly leading military operations, the U.S. has opted to supply weapons to Kyiv while shifting much of the defense burden onto European nations, particularly Germany and France. Trump has also taken a firmer stance against the Zelensky regime, accusing it of provoking the war and alleging massive corruption in the USD 200 billion aid package provided by Washington. All of this highlights Washington’s reluctance to continue bearing military burdens in facing Russia, a challenge that the U.S. has traditionally handled as NATO’s leader.
A major shift in U.S. foreign policy is also evident in its approach to climate change. In the past, America was a leading force in global climate agreements, but with Trump’s reelection, those policies have once again regressed. Trump previously withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Agreement in 2017, arguing that it harmed the American economy and hindered domestic industrial growth. Although the Biden administration rejoined the agreement in 2021, Trump, upon returning to office in 2024, reinstated his previous policies, rejecting stringent energy regulations and prioritizing domestic economic interests over global commitments to reducing carbon emissions. This further reinforces signals that the U.S. no longer wishes to lead global efforts in combating climate change.
The transition to multipolarism also affects America’s role in global poverty alleviation. While Washington once played a dominant role in international financial institutions such as the World Bank and IMF, it is now more selective in distributing foreign aid. Rather than supporting development in emerging nations through large grants, Washington prefers a transactional approach that benefits its own economy. This is evident in how the U.S. has reduced development aid to Africa and Latin America while simultaneously prioritizing investments that directly benefit American private-sector interests.
Additionally, the Trump administration has taken drastic steps by withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization (WHO). This decision was based on dissatisfaction with WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and suspicions that the organization is influenced by political agendas. This withdrawal marks a significant departure from America’s previous commitment to global health cooperation.
Another major shift is the freezing of almost all foreign aid distributed through USAID. The Trump administration ordered a temporary halt on most foreign aid programs for 90 days, with exceptions for emergency food assistance and military financing for Israel and Egypt. This policy has had a substantial impact on humanitarian programs worldwide, including aid for healthcare, education, and infrastructure development.
A similar change is evident in America’s agenda for promoting democracy worldwide. Whereas U.S. foreign policy once emphasized spreading democratic values and human rights as part of its geopolitical strategy, this approach is now being abandoned. Trump is known for his “America First” stance, which prioritizes economic and national security interests over democracy promotion. This can be seen in policies toward countries such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Hungary. Despite criticism from human rights organizations regarding democratic regression and authoritarianism in these nations, Trump maintains close relationships with them based on economic and geopolitical interests. This marks a shift from a values-based approach to a more pragmatic and transactional one.
Transition to Multipolarism
America’s retreat from global leadership signifies a transition toward multipolarism. According to complex systems theory, this reflects a transformation in the global political system that interacts with economic, legal, and military subsystems. While each system operates autonomously with its own internal logic, they remain interconnected through structural coupling mechanisms (imagine these systems as train cars linked together). When the U.S. decides to reduce its role in global military operations, for example, it also impacts economic and diplomatic policies, which become more focused on domestic interests and pragmatic bilateral relations.
While this transition brings short-term benefits for America, such as reducing the economic burden of costly military interventions, it also has long-term consequences for global order. As U.S. leadership in international affairs declines, other powers such as China, Russia, and the European Union are increasingly stepping up to shape global policies. China, for instance, is becoming more aggressive in expanding its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), financing infrastructure projects in various developing nations, while Russia is actively projecting its influence in the Middle East and Africa. This shift indicates that multipolarism is not merely an American isolationist policy but also a consequence of the rise of other powers challenging Washington’s global dominance.
Moreover, Kishore Mahbubani, a Singaporean diplomat and scholar, in his book Has China Won? The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy (2020), highlights that the world is no longer operating in a unipolar framework controlled by the U.S. but rather in a multipolar system where countries like China wield increasing influence. He argues that America’s strategy of withdrawing from global leadership will accelerate this transition. “The West’s dominance of world history was always going to be a temporary phenomenon,” Mahbubani writes, asserting that China’s rise and America’s declining dominance are part of a natural historical cycle.
In his analysis of U.S. foreign policy, John Mearsheimer, a structural realist, in The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities (2018), also critiques Washington’s interventionist policies. According to him, the era in which America felt obligated to spread democracy worldwide has ended. “Liberal hegemony was doomed to fail because it conflicted with the deep-seated nationalism that underpins international politics,” he writes. In other words, Trump’s victory in the 2024 election is not merely a domestic political phenomenon but part of a broader reaction to America’s failure to maintain global dominance through military intervention and liberal diplomacy.
On the other hand, Jeffrey Sachs, an economist and global development expert, in his article for Project Syndicate, argues that Trump’s decision to withdraw from WHO and freeze USAID reflects the erosion of America’s moral leadership in the world. “The United States was once a beacon of global cooperation, but under Trump, it has chosen to abandon its international responsibilities,” he writes. Sachs criticizes these policies as detrimental not only to developing nations reliant on U.S. aid but also to America’s own standing in the global order.
Domestic Economic Reorientation
Despite Trump’s foreign policy shift from globalism to multipolarism, his domestic economic policies are expected to bring significant positive impacts to the United States. By avoiding costly military operations, Trump can reallocate resources to strengthen the domestic economy. “America has spent trillions of dollars on endless wars in the Middle East, money that could have been used to rebuild our own nation,” Trump declared in one of his speeches.
His protectionist policies, including high import tariffs, aim to revive the U.S. manufacturing industry. By imposing tariffs on Chinese and other foreign products, the Trump administration seeks to encourage companies to resume domestic production, creating jobs for American workers. This approach can be seen as a response to globalization, which previously led many U.S. manufacturing industries to relocate overseas in search of cheaper labor.
Additionally, under Trump’s leadership, the U.S. is set to make substantial investments in the technology sector. As the world’s largest economy…
