Isolationism to Imperialism: How Trump’s Foreign Policy Made an Unpredicted Pivot

American Exceptionalism has become the defining feature of Trump’s foreign interactions.

On February 10th, Google made it official: the Gulf of Mexico is now labeled the Gulf of America on maps, in accordance with Trump’s executive order. What once seemed like a shrewd campaign tactic is now a reality. What a relief to know politicians can keep their campaign promises.

It might be easy to shrug off this seemingly insignificant executive order by the Trump Administration, but, in context, the decision indicates a seismic shift in the MAGA movement’s foreign policy. Just a few months ago, the New York Time’s Opinion Columns were filled with articles accusing Trump and his MAGA Republicans of isolationist and protectionist policies. In fairness, such accusations were far from unfounded. Trump’s rhetoric has been consistently anti-NATO and has continuously criticized the previous administration’s aid packages to Ukraine. Economically, the President’s platform was built on tariffs and bolstering American made products. Supporters and dissenters alike recognized that the new Trump administration seemed destined to remove the U.S as much as possible from global conflicts, treaties, and agreements and finally focus on domestic issues.

After a month into Trump’s second term, a new reality is being revealed. The current president has shocked supporters and dissenters alike by reorienting the America First Movement to face the world. First came promises to annex Greenland from Denmark while simultaneously reinstating American control over the Panama Canal. A month later the administration’s first visit from a foreign head of state, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, came with a declaration that the U.S will “own and be responsible for” the Gaza Strip. What happened to Trump the Isolationist?

Put simply, he never existed. It is clear now that Trump’s seemingly isolationist goals were actually means to a greater end. On the campaign trail, tariffs appealed to Trump supporters as a way to bring industry back to America. In the Oval Office, these same tariffs have thus far been a mere bargaining chip to secure the interests of Trump’s administration abroad. Looming the threat of tariffs over Panama has forced the small country to reconsider its allegiances, revoking its partnership with China’s Belt and Road Initiative. This same threat has had the same effect on Columbia and Canada, allowing Trump to move forward on his promises of deportations and border security.

Thus far, Trump’s foreign policy has shown that voters and analysts alike misinterpreted the idea of his “America First” movement[SB1] , and instead chose to believe this implied “America only.” While it may appear to be just a campaign slogan, America First as an idea inherently implies competition and hierarchy, not isolation. For much of the 21st century, the U.S has operated complacently under a system of multipolarity, delicately balancing the interests of its allies, neighbors, and aid beneficiaries in hopes of advancing the altruistic globalist agenda. Far from the global hegemon that it once was, the U.S has bankrolled NATO while other nations fail to meet spending standards, given aid and assets to its global competitors and adversaries such as Iran, and entered into climate agreements to appease the goals of its allies in the West. Years of such mission minded and globally focused foreign policy has seen the U.S decline on the international stage, with China and other competitors filling the void left by U.S complacency.

If the Trump administration has made one thing clear, it's that “America First” means emerging out of a globally focused multipolar system and asserting the U.S as the ultimate pole of power in the world once again. Trade agreements and tariffs will be leveraged for the benefit of the U.S economy, even if this comes at the expense of our allies. With USAID officially dismantled, U.S foreign aid will be more selective, and likely more concerned with helping countries that are willing to work with the goals of Trump’s White House. Furthermore, this administration has reignited the controversial spirit of Manifest Destiny, by toying with U.S expansion into Greenland, Gaza, and Panama.

Whether Trump’s coercive and expansionist foreign policy will be effective in reorienting global order and competition in America’s favor remains to be seen. The question of whether he will even be able to keep up such a controversial foreign agenda for four years also persists. Regardless of these uncertainties, one thing is clear: America will no longer play to the desires of smaller nations and IGOs. Trump has traded American isolationism for American exceptionalism.