Donald Trump rode to office pledging to “drain the swamp,” fight runaway bureaucracy, and defend ordinary Americans against elite-driven progressivism. In a world of “woke” excess and activist courts, these promises resonated deeply with conservatives who believe in smaller government, individual liberty, and strong national defence.
My previous Quadrant online essay, Trump’s war on constitutional democracy prompted a response from James Allan and argued that Donald Trump’s domestic agenda has deteriorated into an assault on America’s constitutional safeguards.
Yet Trump’s surrender of American power abroad reveals an equally troubling dimension of his presidency. Far from delivering “peace through strength,” Trump surrenders vital American interests to adversaries while alienating traditional allies. His approach demonstrates not strategic brilliance but dangerous incompetence that threatens the foundations of American global leadership.
Nowhere is Trump's abandonment of American leadership more evident than in Ukraine. His approach reached a catastrophic climax on February 28, when his White House meeting with Zelensky collapsed into a public shouting match. Trump and Vice President Vance berated the Ukrainian leader for lacking gratitude, with Trump threatening “You're either going to make a deal, or we're out" and claiming Zelensky was "gambling with World War Three.”
Hours later, Trump declared Zelensky “not ready for Peace” and effectively severed relations until Ukraine accepts his terms. The minerals deal that was to be signed during this visit – positioned as payment for American support – was abandoned amid the acrimony.
This public humiliation of a wartime leader represents a profound break in American diplomatic tradition. European leaders watched in horror as decades of careful alliance-building were discarded in minutes. The message to allies is unmistakable: American support now comes with demands for both gratitude and submission. Trump’s justifications relied on blatant distortions – claiming America had spent far more than European allies when, in fact, European nations have allocated $140 billion in aid compared to America's $120 billion. But the damage goes beyond accounting disputes to the heart of American leadership.
This confrontation was the culmination of a pattern of increasingly brazen lies about Ukraine. Trump has falsely accused Ukraine of starting the war with Russia and branded Zelensky a “dictator without elections.“ When confronted with these comments during Prime Minister Starmer's visit just a day before the Zelensky meeting, Trump simply denied his own words, claiming “I can't believe I would say that.“
Trump's attempted extraction of payment from Ukraine for military aid revealed a crudely transactional view of alliances. He initially demanded $500 billion in “payback” – nearly quadruple the actual US aid provided.
The origins of Trump’s approach raise troubling questions about outside influence. His description of Zelensky as a “dictator without elections” directly echoes Kremlin propaganda. Since May 2024, Putin has insisted Zelensky lacks legitimacy because his term expired during wartime, despite Ukraine's prohibition on elections under martial law. When Trump repeated this exact talking point, Russian officials expressed astonishment. “If you had told me just three months ago that these were the words of the US president, I would have laughed out loud,” gloated Dmitri Medvedev, former Russian president and Putin ally. This remarkable alignment with Russian interests has led even seasoned foreign policy experts to question whether Trump’s Ukraine policy serves American interests – or someone else’s.
This alignment was starkly demonstrated at the United Nations on February 25, when the United States lined up with Russia, North Korea and Belarus to vote against a resolution condemning Russia's invasion – abandoning Britain, France, Australia, Japan and dozens of other traditional allies who supported the measure. In the Security Council, America's representative voted alongside Russia and China rather than with Western powers. Former US diplomats described this vote as “humiliating” and “shameful,” but the public dressing-down of Ukraine's wartime president three days later represents an even more profound abandonment of America's post-1945 commitment to supporting democratic nations against aggression.
The consequences of this Russian-aligned policy extend beyond Ukraine to America's entire alliance structure. Trump's team sidelined NATO partners from Ukraine negotiations in Riyadh, fracturing the unity that made sanctions against Russia effective. Vice President Vance used those talks to lecture Europeans about defence spending and progressive policies. Instead of coordinating strategy with allies who have committed billions to Ukraine's defence, Trump's administration treated them as irrelevant bystanders – a pattern that reached its logical conclusion with the exclusion of all allies from his failed approach to Zelensky.
This casual torpedoing of longstanding alliances betrays strategic incompetence. European military budgets may need review, but humiliating NATO partners during delicate peace negotiations serves only Moscow's interests. It tells Putin that Western unity is crumbling. It tells American allies their seven decades of partnership counts for nothing. The message reaches beyond Europe. From Asia to the Middle East, nations that built security strategies around American leadership watch America's treatment of Ukraine’s supporters with growing alarm.
While alienating allies, Trump has simultaneously surrendered to adversaries. By mid-February, Trump’s Defence Secretary declared Ukraine's pre-2014 borders “unrealistic” and NATO membership impossible – conceding Putin's key demands before serious negotiations began. Meeting with Prime Minister Starmer on February 27, Trump explicitly confirmed this capitulation, bluntly declaring about Ukraine's NATO aspirations: “It’s not going to happen. It’s just not going to happen.” The administration even suggested placing Chinese peacekeepers along Ukraine’s frontlines, effectively inviting America’s primary strategic rival to referee a European war.
Some defend this as clever negotiation. But there is no strategic genius in giving Putin everything upfront. Previous US administrations understood that ending wars takes time and leverage. It took nearly two years to negotiate peace in Korea, over three years for Vietnam, and more than five years to broker peace between Israel and Egypt. Trump’s rush to surrender Ukraine’s territory while demanding nothing from Russia betrays not dealmaking skill but dangerous incompetence.
Trump’s broader foreign policy reveals similar recklessness. Consider his treatment of Canada, America’s closest ally. Trump fabricated statistics about non-existent threats, claiming “massive” fentanyl flows across the northern border. The truth demolishes this claim. In the last fiscal year, over 21,000 pounds of fentanyl were seized at the Mexican border, versus only 43 pounds at the Canadian border. Less than 1% of seized fentanyl enters from Canada. Trump declared Canada’s border an “immigration crisis,” alleging “millions and millions” of illegal crossings. Actual numbers show about 23,000 apprehensions in 2024 – roughly 1.5% of those at the Mexican border.
Equally bizarrely, Trump has repeatedly suggested making Canada “our cherished 51st state,” forcing Canadian leaders across the political spectrum to assert their nation’s sovereignty. This was not mere campaign rhetoric but part of a systematic effort to bully America’s closest ally into trade concessions. Trump’s territorial ambition extends beyond North America. He has repeatedly insisted the United States will take control of Greenland, refusing to rule out using military force against Denmark, a NATO ally. When Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen responded that Greenland was not for sale, Trump’s threats prompted Denmark to announce a $2 billion increase in Arctic defence spending. By treating even friendly nations as targets for territorial expansion, Trump echoes the language of aggressive autocrats, undermining decades of American diplomatic credibility.
The consequences spread far beyond North America. China watches Ukraine closely, calculating what a similar strategy might yield regarding Taiwan. Iran notes America’s wavering support for allies, considering its options in the Gulf. North Korea sees opportunities as US security guarantees lose credibility. From Asia to the Middle East, autocrats measure America’s retreat and find fresh confidence.
In Europe, NATO allies watch Ukraine’s abandonment with growing alarm. If the US will not defend a partner actively fighting Russian aggression, they reason, how reliable are American security guarantees to NATO itself? America might welcome Europe belatedly accepting the need for fair burden-sharing of defence costs. But this masks a more serious problem. These countries are increasing military budgets not just to pull their weight in a strong alliance, but because they can no longer trust American leadership. France’s push for autonomous European military capabilities tells the real story – allies who built their security around US partnership now feel they must prepare to stand alone. A NATO where European members spend more but trust America less leaves the West weaker, not stronger.
In Asia, the ripples spread wider. Japan and South Korea, vital US allies, face aggressive neighbours with nuclear weapons. They built their security strategies around American protection. Trump’s transactional approach – demanding cash payments for military support – undermines decades of partnership. Some South Korean conservatives now openly advocate developing nuclear weapons, arguing they cannot trust the American nuclear umbrella.
Trump’s enablers in Congress and his administration argue that fiscal constraints and military realities require an American retreat. Vice President Vance dismisses warnings from respected historians like Niall Ferguson as “moralistic garbage.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who once championed Ukraine as a bulwark against Russian expansion, now facilitates America’s retreat. These figures understand that appeasing Putin serves Russian interests, not American ones. Yet they choose to enable Trump’s dismantling of American power.
Their arguments echo those used to justify British appeasement of Hitler – with catastrophic results. When Britain and France abandoned Czechoslovakia at Munich in 1938, they did not buy peace – they guaranteed a bigger war. Trump’s Ukraine sellout risks the same outcome on a global scale.
The economic consequences are already appearing. Global trade depends on American-led maritime security. The dollar’s reserve currency status rests on faith in US leadership. Trump’s policies threaten both pillars of American economic power. As allies hedge against US unreliability, they will diversify away from dollars in trade. China’s promotion of the yuan as an alternative reserve currency will find more receptive audiences among nations questioning American stability.
Economists have begun warning about serious economic damage. Jesse Rothstein, Berkeley professor and former chief economist at the US labour department, predicts “a deep, deep recession” by spring. Trump’s 25 per cent tariffs against Mexico and Canada threaten to cripple the North American auto industry, according to Ford executives. Torsten Slok of Apollo Global notes that the US Economic Policy Uncertainty Index now exceeds levels seen during the Great Recession. Meanwhile, companies like Freyr Battery, Kore Power, and Heliene have already cancelled major investment projects worth billions due to Trump’s executive orders freezing infrastructure spending.
The suicide of American power
Since World War II, America’s unique combination of military might, economic dynamism, and moral authority made it the world’s indispensable nation. Countries accepted US leadership not just out of fear but because America stood for something larger – a world where law trumped force, where prosperity came through cooperation not conquest.
Its defence of allies created a network of partnerships that magnified its strength. Its moral authority as leader of the free world gave it diplomatic influence far beyond its military reach.
Trump’s actions systematically dismantle this framework. His domestic assault on independent institutions weakens the rule of law that attract global capital and talent. His betrayal of allies undermines the partnerships that magnified American influence. Each move diminishes qualities that made America truly exceptional – not just its weapons, but its reliability as a partner and champion of constitutional democracy.
America’s nuclear arsenal ensures it will remain a military superpower. But mere military might does not make a nation truly powerful. The qualities that made America exceptional – stable institutions, reliable partnerships, and moral authority – face systematic dismantling under Trump.
In these three columns, we have traced Trump’s twin assaults on America’s foundations: the domestic war on constitutional limits and now this international betrayal of American leadership. These are not separate phenomena but manifestations of the same authoritarian instinct. A leader who claims immunity from law at home will inevitably abandon principles abroad.
The spectacle of Trump publicly berating Zelensky in the Oval Office while demanding gratitude for assistance against an illegal invasion perfectly illustrates America's diminishing global stature and moral authority. What previous generations of American leaders would have recognised as a moral and strategic imperative – supporting a democracy under attack – Trump frames as a transaction deserving of payment and subservience. This is not the behavior of a confident superpower but of a nation abandoning its founding principles, sacrificing long-term influence for short-term posturing.
History’s verdict on declining empires is clear. Great powers decline not from external defeat but from abandoning the principles that made them strong. America’s decline begins not with military loss, but with a leader who trades away the constitutional democracy and global leadership that made it truly exceptional.
To read the full article on the Quadrant website, click here.