In the first year and a half of Donald Trump’s second presidency, national leaders have adopted a range of different strategies to mitigate the damage Trump has caused internationally, writes Keir Giles in The Independent.
These strategies have changed significantly over time. In the first year, most foreign leaders tried to maintain their relations with the United States by choosing what they saw as the path of least resistance - giving in to Trump’s threats, catering to his vision of reality and not challenging even his most outrageous behavior.
That changed in early 2026, as leaders began to realize the limits of appeasement. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has repeatedly led the world in his opposition to Trump, a strategy that is as potentially damaging as it is popular at home.
This approach is not universal. In contrast, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, perhaps because of the unique nature of his position, still believes that the best course of action is a fixed smile and a greasy humiliation in response to every insult and attack from Trump and his staff.
But while strategies for dealing with Trump may evolve, there are some basic assumptions about the nature of the new normal in global affairs that in some cases remain unchanged, with potentially dangerous consequences.
This includes in particular the belief that lingers in some communities that Trump is a temporary aberration, that his time in power will soon be over and as soon as he is gone, things will begin to return to "normal".
Although the UK National Security Strategy does not refer directly to Trump, it looks poignantly to the time "when we emerge from this period of turbulence" — as if all we have to do is wait and things will get better. And politicians in democratic countries around the world have expressed similar hopes for waiting out the Trump administration, which is due to end in 2028.
Democracies around the world need to be prepared that the process of authoritarian takeover of the state in the United States will not be reversed anytime soon.
But there are a number of reasons why that kind of hope does not amount to a strategy. In a new book published this week, titled "The Bringing Down of America," I argue why we should instead prepare for a "period of turbulence" that will last well beyond that time.
First, Trump may not necessarily leave on schedule. His team is working hard to ensure that the upcoming election, if it happens at all, will produce an outcome that does not mean a change of power. Voter suppression and seizing control of the democratic process are just two ways the administration hopes to distort the outcome of the upcoming midterm elections in November 2026 and the presidential election in 2028. And Trump has repeatedly stated his intention to run for a third term. This is expressly prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, but Trump and his team have already convincingly demonstrated how easy it is to ignore the laws and the Constitution itself with the support of a docile Supreme Court.
Second, it’s not just Trump. For years, Russia watchers, presented with relentless optimism that relations with Moscow would improve after Vladimir Putin’s death, had to explain that the problem was not just one man and that Putinism would outlast Putin. Now Trump’s circle of like-minded people represents the same problem in the United States. Even if Trump leaves, he is surrounded by people who think and act like him and who will be ready to take over in his place.
Third, some of the changes under Trump may be irreversible. Democracies around the world will be eager to try to rebuild their relationships with a future U.S. administration that once again sees American power as being enhanced, not diminished, through partnerships and alliances. But the turmoil caused by Trump’s random and unpredictable tariffs has already reshuffled global trade relations, and it is unlikely that, even if some trust is eventually restored, other countries will again allow their security and economic policies to be so vulnerable to Washington’s favor.
These long-lasting changes affect both life in the United States and its foreign affairs. The ongoing systemic damage to the U.S. economy, with the national debt now exceeding $40 trillion and the interest burden rising accordingly, is a crisis that will last long after Trump leaves office. The fierce attacks on vaccination programs and food safety inspections have already been felt in spikes in infectious and foodborne illnesses that have swept across parts of the United States. And the environmental damage, where protections for both people and the environment have been dismantled in favor of the further self-enrichment of Trump’s oligarch friends, will be irreversible.
In short, democracies around the world must be prepared that the process of authoritarian power grab in the United States will not be reversed anytime soon and that the global retreat of American power will become more firmly entrenched.
The European belief that a rules-based international order and international law can replace investments in hard power was a luxury provided by the umbrella of hard power of the United States. Now that umbrella is steadily expanding, countries like the United Kingdom are still in denial about the coming storm.
To understand the scale of the danger, it is enough to compare Trump’s policies with Moscow’s long-standing ambitions for the United States. As I discovered while researching "The Downfall of America", the direct coincidences are overwhelming in number and clarity. As former Trump adviser Fiona Hill noted after reviewing the evidence, "Donald Trump's political template is Vladimir Putin's".
This means that any lingering confusion of hope with strategy should have been firmly set aside by now. European leaders should be in no doubt that a world in which US policy is inspired by Moscow is extremely dangerous for democracies - and this is not a storm to wait out, but a climate change that requires adaptation for survival.