Over the past four years after Donald Trump’s first presidency, the global security landscape has undergone profound transformations. The new administration is now seeking to reclaim the United States—what Trump calls the beginning of America’s Golden Age—a shift that will certainly have significant implications for U.S. foreign policy, in addition to its domestic politics and society (which are not the focus of this report).
Compared to 2017, the new Trump administration appears better prepared, having already announced key appointments and specific plans. However, it is already predictable that the decision-making process—being centered around Trump’s personality and loyalty to him—will likely introduce elements of disorder, instability, and unpredictability into governance and policymaking.
It is expected that Trump’s second term will embrace what can be called a strategy of disruption and strategic chaos in pursuit of radical and revolutionary changes rather than gradual reforms. This perspective is influenced by the culture of Silicon Valley startups and generationally revolutionary philosophies, which perceive crises not necessarily as disastrous events but as gateways to a new era. From this viewpoint, America is currently at a critical juncture that, according to Trump supporters, will lead to a new historical age—the so-called Golden Age of America.
Despite the aura of disorder and instability, Trump’s second term can be analyzed through the lens of four key components: National sovereignty, Economic nationalism (new mercantilism), Delegation and transfer of power, Breaking free from conventional restraints
These components, derived from Trump’s statements and those of his close allies, can be systematically linked under the overarching concept of disruption and strategic chaos.
1. National Sovereignty
Donald Trump’s ultimate goal is to emphasize the United States’ independence from other international actors and to control flows across American borders—including people, goods, services, and even ideas—whose speed and influence have been amplified by globalization. In foreign policy, this means reducing engagement with international institutions or even withdrawing from them (such as re-exiting the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Health Organization) and revisiting international agreements that, in Trump’s view, limit America’s freedom of action.
Trump prefers bilateral negotiations because they allow him to exploit power asymmetries and exert greater leverage over negotiating partners. This approach will likely weaken the liberal international order even further but, from Trump’s and his supporters’ perspective, will enable the U.S. to secure more favorable international agreements. Although bilateralism and limited multilateralism have precedent in U.S. foreign policy, this trend is expected to accelerate significantly during Trump’s second term.
2. Economic Nationalism (New Mercantilism)
Trump’s economic nationalism is aimed at creating a thriving American economy and ensuring the success of American businesses—including his own. To achieve this, Trump and his allies have pursued three primary strategies:
- Protecting and prioritizing American jobs and industries to enhance economic resilience
- Stimulating growth through tax cuts and deregulation
- Reducing the trade deficit
In foreign trade policy, Trump primarily seeks to advance these goals through historically unprecedented tariff increases (not seen since the 1930s), economic pressure on nations he accuses of unfair trade practices, restrictions on foreign direct investment and foreign ownership, and other trade barriers justified on national security grounds. These measures also extend to severe restrictions on data flows to countries the U.S. perceives as adversarial.
3. Delegation and Transfer of Power
Trump’s vision involves reducing U.S. dependence on allies while simultaneously scaling back America’s commitments to them. Instead of sharing burdens, Trump prefers to shift them. In his view, America’s international commitments should be reassessed through a transactional lens, ensuring maximum returns at minimal cost to the U.S. To this end, the Trump team is likely to employ a mix of rhetorical threats, economic incentives, and escalation tactics.
As seen in his first term, Trump’s approach will pressure NATO allies and U.S. alliance networks—especially in the Indo-Pacific—to increase their defense spending or contribute more financially to U.S. military presence on their soil. Regional actors will also be expected to assume greater responsibility for maintaining the parts of the liberal international order that Trump’s administration does not explicitly oppose. The second Trump administration is also likely to favor limited multilateralism—forming agreements with small groups of select nations on specific issues of interest, structured as memorandums of understanding or statements rather than formal treaties.
4. Breaking free from conventional restraints
The final component of Trump’s governance strategy involves expanding his personal power—first within the executive branch and then across his administration more broadly. The ultimate goal is both self-aggrandizement and fulfilling his promise to build the America envisioned by supporters of the Make America Great Again movement. Strengthening Trump’s authority and fostering support for his authoritarian tendencies may, in the long run, erode America’s constitutional checks and balances, further distancing his administration from historical democratic norms.
In foreign policy, reducing constraints on Trump’s power could have severe global consequences. A less constrained presidency would allow Trump to pursue his longstanding foreign policy preferences, such as further distancing the U.S. from multilateral institutions, increasing financial burdens on allies in Europe and Asia, and redefining alliances based on immediate U.S. interests rather than broader security concerns. This could endanger routine cooperation with allies and partners, leading to negative consequences for international crisis management—whether in regional conflicts, nuclear proliferation threats, or other global stability challenges.
The Logic of Strategic Chaos
The four components outlined above interact dynamically. While none of them alone—or even all together—fully represent the potential developments of Trump’s second term, their combined effect signals an administration determined to implement sweeping changes across all domains. The key question is: What is Trump’s strategy for achieving these changes? Does he seek radical change within the system, or does he aim to dismantle the system itself?
Judging by Trump’s rhetoric and that of his supporters, they appear unconcerned with preserving the existing framework—suggesting an openness to chaos as a means of achieving their ultimate goal: creating something entirely new. This chaotic mindset is deeply rooted in the startup culture of Silicon Valley and generationally driven revolutionary philosophies—championed by figures like Steve Bannon—that view disruption and crisis not as threats but as essential steps toward progress and evolution. In this paradigm, uncertainty and chaos are not just inevitable but necessary.
From this perspective, a crisis—whether manufactured or organic, domestic or international—will ultimately lead to the emergence of something new: a new golden age for America. In this view, chaos is not merely acceptable but desirable, as it enables the birth of a stronger, healthier society. Inspired by this philosophy, Trump and his administration genuinely perceive themselves as saviors on a mission to create a new world with America at its core.
As such, in the absence of strong resistance to Trump’s agenda, the world must brace itself for a new era of profound chaos and uncertainty.
