A month into Donald Trump’s second term as U.S. president, it has change into clear around the globe that America’s approach to foreign policy is undergoing a big change.
Because the end of the Second World War, the US’ alliance with the West has held regular, but as that evolves, those that study history say the world order we’ve got known for 80 years might be set for a seismic shift.
“Clearly there’s deep concern around the globe about this being a retreat from leadership (by the US) to a more transactional, unilateralist approach to diplomacy,” said John Blaxland, a professor of International Security on the Australian National University.
“That is such uncharted territory; none of us have actually lived through anything like this before.”
Many European leaders were stunned earlier this month when in a blistering speech on the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Vice-President JD Vance told the audience “there’s a brand new sheriff on the town under Donald Trump’s leadership” and warned governments that internal threats to democracy, like election cancellations and censorship, are greater threats to their countries than external antagonists like China and Russia.
“The threat that I worry probably the most about vis-à-vis Europe shouldn’t be Russia, it’s not China, it’s not another external actor,” Vance said, speaking on the Munich Security Conference.
“What I worry about is the threat from inside — the retreat of Europe from a few of its most fundamental values, values shared with the US of America.”
Days later, Trump appeared to reverse course on the country’s support for Ukraine, adopting hostile rhetoric paying homage to the misinformation regularly shared by Russian President Vladimir Putin
Get each day National news
Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.
During a press conference earlier, when asked why Ukraine wasn’t included within the U.S.-Russia talks, Trump accused Ukraine not only of avoiding a negotiated end to the war but additionally of starting it.
“Today I heard, ‘Oh, well, we weren’t invited. ‘Well, you’ve been there for 3 years. It’s best to have ended it three years (ago). It’s best to have never began it,” he said.
Historian Andrew Gawthorpe says the previous couple of weeks have been a “tremendously significant moment” with serious implications for the remaining of the world.
“For the primary time there’s a rift within the Western Alliance,” said the Leiden University professor in an interview with Global News from his home in Leiden, Netherlands.
“It actually looks as if Trump’s dream is to affix with Vladimir Putin in redrawing the safety order in Europe, redrawing the international order in Europe.”
Gawthorpe says you’d must return to the late Nineteen Forties to search out a comparably significant historical time.
“It’s after World War Two that the US accepted that it was going to play a outstanding role in upholding this world order and upholding security in Europe as well. That’s when the U.S. sent troops permanently to Europe for the primary time.” he said.
“Trump desires to undo this order. He believes that it has been many years and many years of the remaining of the world making the most of the US.”
What it will mean for the international community has change into the sudden focus of students and governments across the globe.
“I feel everyone seems to be in search of a plan B immediately,” said Blaxland.
“Everyone’s attempting to think, ‘OK, now what?’”
Donald Heflin, a Senior Fellow at Tufts University and a former U.S. diplomat, believes institutions just like the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the NATO alliance are strong enough to survive the following 4 years.
“(The U.S) is a vital player. Are we indispensable or could these alliances pick up and get the work done? I feel the latter. I feel they’ll survive,” Heflin said.
“Though there might be some bad things that occur over the following three or 4 years and it will be great if these institutions were stronger during that point to take care of them.”
Heflin believes protecting these institutions and alliances is in the very best interest in the US as well.
“It’s been a rather more peaceful, rather more stable world and it’s as a result of the labor of all member countries in those institutions.”
Each Blaxland and Gawthorpe say a weakened Western alliance can be seen as a possibility for China to expand its sphere of influence around the globe.
“It is a huge opening for China,” said Blaxland. “That is a possibility for China to say, ‘See, America, what’s it? What do they hold over us? Principles? Soft power? Moral authority? International rules?’ These have all been thrown up within the air.”
“We’re going to be living in a world with three big superpowers in the US, Russia and China,” said Gawthorpe.
“We’re going to see increasingly that small countries don’t have their voices listened to and that they’re bent to the desire of those superpowers.”
Countries like Canada, Gawthorpe suspects, may have few cards to play.
“The foundations and international laws and institutions that gave them a voice and gave them influence in global affairs are seemingly wilting away, replaced by this rule of strongmen,” Gawthorpe said.
“I feel that we’re heading to a world of much greater instability and unpredictability. (To say) we’re heading towards war is just too pessimistic but we are able to say that the situation globally is becoming rather more contentious.”
© 2025 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.
