Ammon News - By Kerry Boyd Anderson- As ever, a new year comes with new challenges and opportunities. For US foreign policy, the new Trump administration, which will take office on Jan. 20, will shape the country’s approach to the world. As with all presidents, Donald Trump will have significant power to determine foreign policy but will also have to determine how to respond to events that are unexpected or outside of US control.

When Trump once again becomes president, he and his senior advisers will face two major wars — in Ukraine and Gaza — that have bedeviled the outgoing administration. Trump has repeatedly said that he could very quickly end the war between Russia and Ukraine and now he will have an opportunity to attempt to do so. Trump and some of his top advisers have expressed skepticism about or opposition to America’s provision of weapons and aid to Ukraine. It is very likely that Ukraine will face a major reduction in US assistance once Trump returns to the White House.

Trump recently appointed Keith Kellogg as his special envoy to address the war. Kellogg has proposed using the threat of cutting off future aid as leverage to force Ukraine to negotiate, while offering incentives such as putting off NATO membership for Ukraine and alleviating sanctions to persuade Moscow to negotiate. Regardless of the policy specifics, Ukraine will find itself in a weaker position vis-a-vis Russia, which indeed might lead to negotiations to end the war, but probably on terms that are more disappointing to Kyiv than to Moscow.

A related challenge will be managing relations with European allies. Trump’s lack of commitment to NATO, as he expressed during his first term in office, will pose a challenge for the organization, which gained strength from new members during Biden’s term but also faces multiple threats from internal tensions and Russia. Advocates for greater European cooperation on security and autonomy from the US on defense matters are hoping that their efforts will gain momentum during the second Trump presidency.

The war in Gaza is likely to still be ongoing when Trump is inaugurated. The Trump administration’s approach will feature enthusiastic support for Israel. Trump’s picks for foreign policy advisers are all extremely pro-Israel. For example, his nominee for secretary of state, Marco Rubio, recently wrote that “Israelis rightfully living in their historic homeland are not the impediment to peace; the Palestinians are.”

Trump’s choice for ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, has said that “there is no such thing as the West Bank — it’s Judea and Samaria,” and that “there is no such thing as an (Israeli) occupation.” Other senior foreign policy officials chosen by Trump express similar sentiments. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will have even greater US support under Trump and will face no serious pressure from the new administration to change his approach toward Gaza or the West Bank.

The Trump administration will face the continuing risk that the war in Gaza helps to drive other regional conflicts. Even if the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel holds through Trump’s inauguration, the risk of renewed fighting is high. The outgoing administration has also struggled to respond to evolving risks posed by the Houthis in Yemen and Trump will inherit that challenge.

The new administration’s pro-Israel lens will be applied to the challenge of dealing with Iran, including less pressure on Israel to restrain its potential actions. Many of Trump’s top foreign policy advisers take a hawkish approach toward Iran; however, Trump does not seek another protracted war in the Middle East that might involve US troops. His desire to avoid direct involvement in a war that could be costly in terms of American lives and funds might constrain some of his advisers’ more hawkish tendencies.

One of the few areas of bipartisan agreement in Washington is that China poses the greatest long-term threat to the US. Over the years, Trump has spoken both negatively and positively about China and Chinese President Xi Jinping, but his advisers are mostly hawkish toward Beijing. Furthermore, the US defense establishment sees China as its “pacing threat” and the top potential challenger to American power and interests. Trump’s administration is very likely to view China as a key competitor and threat and to seek to shift resources away from the Middle East toward East Asia — though the same was true for the last several presidents, with limited success.

It will be important to watch how the Trump administration shapes the details of its approach toward China. Trump has promised very high tariffs against Beijing, but he has both official and unofficial advisers who oppose that. Some of his advisers want to back Taiwan, but Trump appears less likely to be willing to risk significant military losses to protect the island. He may prefer to engage in economic rather than military conflict with Beijing. China will loom large in US foreign policy, but the details on how the Trump administration will manage the challenge are not yet fully clear.

Increasing US-China competition, combined with uncertainty regarding Washington’s future policy, creates a challenge for US allies in the Pacific, including South Korea and Japan. South Korea has particular reason to worry about the depth of US commitment to its alliance, given statements from Trump that suggest he wants a more transactional relationship. Recent media reports suggest that Trump would like to renew talks with North Korea. Security in East Asia will depend significantly on how Trump approaches China and North Korea, as well as how Beijing and Pyongyang respond.

The Biden administration placed significant emphasis on cooperation to address global concerns, such as climate change, but Trump and many of his advisers express disdain for international institutions. For example, his nominee for ambassador to the UN, Elise Stefanik, is very critical of the institution. Trump has called climate change “a hoax” and will likely withdraw from the Paris Agreement, as he did during his first term.

As the Trump administration determines how to respond to new challenges that might arise in 2025, it will do so on a unilateral basis or by working with specific countries, rather than through multilateral institutions.

Elsewhere, Trump’s strong opposition to illegal immigration will define Washington’s relations with Central and South America.

Trump’s “America First” approach opposes sending US taxpayers’ dollars abroad without clear, concrete returns, so US aid to developing countries is likely to drop, especially where previous aid was based on concepts of soft power and promoting American values. Relations with India will likely see continuity, as Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi get along well and Trump’s advisers do not see India as a major concern.

The world is more prepared for a second Trump term than it was for the first, which came as something of a surprise to many global actors. However, Trump’s second presidency will be different from his first in many ways, as already evidenced by his selection of advisers based more on their strong alignment with him and less on their experience within the political or national security establishments. Washington’s approach to foreign policy challenges in 2025 will diverge significantly from its approach in 2024 — and possibly from Trump’s first term.

Kerry Boyd Anderson is a writer and political risk consultant with more than 18 years of experience as a professional analyst of international security issues and Middle East political and business risk.