Trump Foreign Policy 2024: Will America Shift Toward Isolationism?

Trump Foreign Policy 2024

Will Trump be an isolationist?

The upcoming US presidential election presents a significant contrast in foreign policy perspectives between former President Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Vice President Kamala Harris, with Trump advocating for “America First” policies and historically high tariffs. At the same time, Harris supports continued engagement with global allies. Historian Joseph J. Ellis likens this election to the pivotal 1860 election, emphasizing the critical choice between maintaining U.S. global leadership or reverting to isolationism.

Critics, including Condoleezza Rice and Mike Pence, express concerns about the implications of a potential return to isolationism, especially in light of rising authoritarian regimes. Despite accusations of isolationism, experts note that Trump’s foreign policy has included strategic initiatives like the revival of the Quad, indicating a complex approach that balances traditional alliances with a focus on U.S. interests.

Key Concepts

• Donald Trump proposed imposing “historically high tariffs” on imported goods, which raised concerns about potential isolationism.
• U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned that isolationism could harm the United States and its global standing.
• The upcoming presidential election starkly contrasts Trump’s “America First” policy and Kamala Harris’s support for international engagement.
• Historian Joseph J. Ellis likened the current election to the pivotal 1860 election, emphasizing its significance for U.S. foreign policy.
• Critics, including Condoleezza Rice, express concerns about a return to isolationism, drawing parallels to the pre-World War II era.
• Rice argues that American isolationism undermines national security and prosperity in the face of authoritarian challenges.
• A recent survey indicates that American support for an active global role is at historic lows, with only 56% favoring U.S. involvement in world affairs.
• Former Vice President Mike Pence criticized Trump’s comments on Taiwan as indicative of a dangerous trend toward isolationism among Republicans.
• John Bolton raised alarms about the potential for Trump to withdraw the U.S. from NATO if re-elected.
• Trump’s revival of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) indicates a complex foreign policy approach that includes traditional alliances.
• Analysts argue that Trump is focused on the benefits of international involvement rather than embodying traditional isolationism.
• Experts suggest that Trump seeks to reduce U.S. military involvement in Europe and East Asia while encouraging allies to take on greater defense responsibilities.
• JD Vance’s pragmatic foreign policy views align with a unilateralist realist approach similar to Trump’s.
• The evolution of the Quad reflects a strategic alliance that has gained importance under both the Trump and Biden administrations.
• Despite controversies surrounding Trump’s remarks, increased defense spending among NATO members has strengthened the alliance.

After Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump said on Tuesday (October 15) that he would impose “historically high tariffs” on imported goods, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said on Thursday (October 17) that isolating the United States with high tariffs would be a big mistake. “America’s isolationism and strategic retreat will make all of us worse off,” Yellen said in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The US presidential election is about to come to an end. On the issue of foreign policy, the fierce competition between Trump and Democratic presidential candidate and US Vice President Kamala Harris has been portrayed as a battle over whether the United States will return to isolationism. Trump has always been skeptical of excessive international obligations, and his “America First” policy has been criticized as a political stance that is tantamount to isolationism, while Vice President Harris is widely believed to continue the current government’s foreign policy and actively unite allies to play a leading role in global affairs.

Given the two candidates’ different positions on the core issue of how the United States should participate in international affairs, some observers believe that the United States foreign policy may once again usher in a historic turning point. The results of the election are believed to be directly related to the resolution of major hotspot conflicts in the world today, such as the Ukrainian war, and will even have a profound impact on the international order dominated by the United States since World War II.

Joseph J. Ellis, a historian and Pulitzer Prize winner for history told VOA that the two candidates’ opposing positions on a series of major domestic and international issues make this election of great historical significance. “As an American historian, I would say that there is only one election that can be compared to the significance of this election, and that was the election of 1860 when we elected Abraham Lincoln,” he said.

In terms of foreign policy, Ellis pointed out that this election has once again put the United States at a crossroads in its foreign relations: “In my opinion, the most important foreign policy issue is whether the United States decides to give up its position as the world’s leading power or return to American isolationism.”

Critics worry the US is sliding back into isolationism

Even within the Republican Party, there is no shortage of criticism of Trump’s foreign policy. Condoleezza Rice, who served as Secretary of State during the administration of former Republican President George W. Bush, recently wrote that in the era before World War II, great powers were constantly in conflict, the international order was fragile, and populism and isolationism were on the rise. “The same is true in today’s era,” she wrote.

From the tensions in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea to China’s rise in many fields such as economy and technology, Rice’s article on the Foreign Affairs website mainly uses China as an example to emphasize that isolationism will make the United States unable to cope with global challenges. “Isolation has never been the answer to national security or prosperity,” she warned in the article titled “The Dangers of American Isolationism.”

Rice reiterated at a public event at Notre Dame University last week that she understands Americans may be tired after nearly 80 years of world leadership, but “if we don’t shape it (the world), the big powers that shape it are authoritarian countries like China and Russia, and we are not going to like that world.”

An August survey by the nonpartisan nonprofit Chicago Council on Global Affairs showed that Americans’ support for playing an active global role is near historic lows. The Chicago Council on Global Affairs was founded in 1922, at a time when the United States was considered isolationist. Since 1974, the influential policy forum has conducted annual surveys on whether the United States should play an active role in world affairs. The latest Chicago Council on Global Affairs survey found that only 56% of Americans believe that the United States should play an active role in world affairs, and as many as 43% of respondents do not approve of participating in world affairs, far lower than the support rate of 70%.

Trump’s former vice president Mike Pence criticized Trump’s remarks that Taiwan is far away from the United States and close to China as typical isolationism.

Pence said in a foreign policy speech at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington last year that some Republicans, including former President Trump, “are abandoning America’s traditional conservative stance on leadership on the world stage and embracing a new and dangerous isolationism.”

Former White House National Security Advisor John Bolton even warned that Trump might withdraw from NATO if he is re-elected. “The possibility that he will withdraw from NATO is very high,” Bolton said in an exclusive interview with CNN last week.

Is Trump an isolationist?

Despite this, some people may not know that the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD), which is now considered a model for the United States to work with its allies to safeguard common interests, was actually resurrected during Trump’s presidency.

The “Quadrilateral Security Dialogue” began in 2007, but was disbanded the following year amid strong protests from China. In 2017, nearly 10 years after the mechanism had collapsed, Trump reached an agreement with the leaders of Japan, Australia, and India during the ASEAN Summit in Manila in November of that year to revive this Indo-Pacific security mechanism that China is extremely taboo about.

On the other hand, Trump did not hesitate to reduce the United States’ commitments to urge allies such as Japan and South Korea to share more defense funds. As early as 1987, when Trump was still far away from politics and was just a real estate businessman, he published full-page advertisements in the Boston Globe, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, attacking Japan, Saudi Arabia, and other countries for “taking advantage of the United States” and the United States paying a high price “to protect their interests.”

While Trump’s stance has sparked a lot of criticism, some analysts believe that he is not an isolationist in the traditional sense.

“Trump has never been so concerned about whether the United States participates in world affairs as he is about what the United States gets from such participation,” said James Lindsay, former senior vice president and distinguished senior fellow for foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, in an analytical article titled “2024 Election: Is Donald Trump an Isolationist?”

Robert Ross, a professor of political science at Boston College, told VOA that “isolationism” is a strong word because it means a complete reversal of current U.S. policy and a total withdrawal, which he does not think will happen.

Lubbin said he does not think Trump wants to withdraw from Europe completely or simply from East Asia, but he does think Trump wants to reduce the U.S. presence in Europe and wants other countries to take on a larger share. “The dual consequences of doing so will increase doubts in these regions about the U.S. willingness to maintain its military commitments and deepen doubts about the U.S. ability to counter the growth of Russian power in Europe and Chinese power in East Asia.”

The China expert said this would also inevitably weaken the US’s political influence, “because more countries will have to cooperate with China,” he said.

Dean Chen, a professor of political science at Ramapo College of New Jersey, believes that Trump showed some populist tendencies during his last term, but he is not an isolationist in the strict sense. Instead, he is more of a unilateralist or transactional realist.

“He prefers to evaluate every foreign policy contingency based on whether the United States can gain significant material benefits,” Chen Ding said in an email to VOA. “I don’t think Trump’s recent comments to Bloomberg indicate that his potential new administration will abandon Taiwan, but he clearly wants to make a price, just like his comments about NATO, Japan, and South Korea, which convey that the US military commitment and defense is not free.”

Chen Ding said that JD Vance, the Republican vice presidential candidate, also seems to have demonstrated quite pragmatic foreign policy views. Like Trump, he is not an isolationist but a unilateralist realist.

Continuity of U.S. government policy

Since the end of World War II, European allies have viewed their allies as the ultimate security guarantee, and Trump’s warning that NATO members that do not spend 2% of their gross domestic product on defense will not be protected by the United States is one of his most controversial remarks. However, on the other hand, the United States has long urged European allies to share costs.

In 2011, Robert Gates, former defense secretary under President Barack Obama, criticized Europe for not fulfilling its obligations and said the United States was tired of carrying out combat missions for those who “did not want to share the benefits.” He then proposed a defense spending target of 2 percent of GDP at a NATO summit in Chicago.

Although Trump’s words sparked controversy, Andrew Hoehn, senior vice president of research and analysis at the U.S. think tank RAND Corporation, said in an interview with VOA that there is no doubt that NATO has become stronger after he put pressure on NATO allies and these countries increased their defense spending. “I think it is necessary to distinguish between general remarks and actual actions and results,” said Hoehn. “I think it is more meaningful to focus on actual actions.”

After Trump restarted the Quad, the Biden administration upgraded the Quad from a ministerial level to a leader level. Horn, a security expert at the US think tank RAND Corporation, said that the differences between the candidates cannot be ignored. These policy differences do exist, but there is also policy continuity between the candidates. He said: “The Quad is a very important example. It has been given new life and vitality and continues to play a role.”