The Cheap Hegemon: How Donald Trump Exemplified a New Foreign Policy Approach
The Cheap Hegemon: How Donald Trump Exemplified a New Foreign Policy Approach
Trying to get more for less is a surprisingly novel idea in Washington.
Since the end of the Cold War, U.S. foreign and national security policy has been marked by inconsistency and a lack of coherence. Successive administrations have oscillated between overreaction and underreaction to global events, often incurring significant costs to American citizens—whether through costly military interventions or the consequences of inaction. In this landscape of uncertainty, the United States has struggled to define a clear and sustainable role on the global stage.
Enter Donald Trump. His administration’s foreign policy, often criticized for its unpredictability and transactional nature, can be seen as an embodiment of what might be termed the “cheap hegemon” approach. Trump’s foreign policy aimed to maintain U.S. dominance while minimizing costs, both in terms of American lives and financial resources. This approach, while unconventional, represented a shift towards a more pragmatic and cost-effective form of global leadership.
Trump’s presidency marked a significant departure from the traditional U.S. foreign policy framework that had largely been in place since the end of the Second World War. The traditional “hawk” view, dominant in Washington, emphasized maintaining American hegemony through a muscular foreign policy that often involved extensive military interventions. This approach, rooted in the belief that the U.S. must act as the world’s police force to ensure global stability and protect American interests, had led to costly engagements in regions like the Middle East.
Trump, however, approached foreign policy with a different mindset. He questioned the need for America to bear the brunt of global leadership costs, particularly when these interventions did not clearly serve the national interest. His administration prioritized U.S. economic interests, renegotiated trade deals to benefit American workers, and pressured allies to share the financial burden of defense. Trump’s foreign policy was transactional, often framed around the question: “What’s in it for America?”
One of the clearest examples of Trump’s cheap hegemon approach was his administration’s stance on military engagements. Trump was vocal about his desire to reduce U.S. troop deployments abroad, particularly in conflict zones like Syria and Afghanistan. While his decision to withdraw troops from Syria faced criticism from both sides of the political aisle, it was consistent with his broader goal of reducing the financial and human costs of American involvement in foreign conflicts.
Trump also sought to redefine U.S. alliances, insisting that NATO allies contribute more to their own defense. By pushing European nations to increase their defense spending, Trump aimed to reduce the financial burden on the United States while still maintaining its leadership role within the alliance. This approach was emblematic of the cheap hegemon strategy: maintaining influence without bearing unnecessary costs.
Trump’s foreign policy was also characterized by a transactional approach to diplomacy. He engaged in high-profile negotiations with adversaries like North Korea, aiming to secure tangible benefits for the U.S. while avoiding costly military confrontations. While these efforts yielded mixed results, they demonstrated Trump’s willingness to leverage America’s dominant position in unconventional ways, prioritizing economic and strategic gains over ideological commitments.
Trump’s renegotiation of trade agreements, particularly NAFTA (which was replaced by the USMCA), further exemplified his emphasis on securing better deals for the U.S. at a lower cost. By focusing on economic interests and using America’s market power as leverage, Trump sought to maximize benefits for American workers and industries without resorting to costly and expansive international commitments.
Critics of Trump’s foreign policy argued that his “America First” approach risked alienating allies and emboldening adversaries. However, his strategy was not one of isolationism, but rather of selective engagement. Trump understood the importance of maintaining U.S. leadership but was intent on doing so in a way that minimized unnecessary expenditures and focused on the national interest.
In the Middle East, for example, Trump brokered the Abraham Accords, facilitating diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab nations. This achievement underscored Trump’s ability to wield U.S. influence without resorting to military force or costly interventions. It was a clear example of how a cheap hegemon could maintain and even expand its influence through diplomacy and strategic partnerships, rather than through force.
Donald Trump’s foreign policy was far from conventional, and it sparked considerable debate among policymakers and scholars alike. However, it undeniably represented a shift towards a more cost-conscious form of global leadership. By emphasizing the importance of reducing financial and human costs while maintaining U.S. influence, Trump’s approach exemplified the principles of the cheap hegemon.
As the U.S. continues to navigate a complex and often chaotic international landscape, the lessons from Trump’s foreign policy may prove increasingly relevant. Future administrations might find value in a strategy that seeks to balance global leadership with fiscal responsibility, ensuring that America remains a dominant force on the world stage without overextending itself. In this way, the concept of the cheap hegemon may become a guiding principle for U.S. foreign policy in the years to come.
The post The Cheap Hegemon: How Donald Trump Exemplified a New Foreign Policy Approach appeared first on The American Conservative.