The return of Donald Trump to the presidency has catalysed significant shifts in U.S. governance, with profound implications for domestic stability and social cohesion. His administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement, restructuring of federal agencies, and assertive military realignment have heightened political polarisation. The near-total downsizing of USAID by 95%, signals a deliberate retreat from international development commitments, which critics argue could exacerbate instability in fragile states that are dependent on U.S. aid.
At the core of Trump’s governance strategy is executive consolidation, wherein key institutional changes reinforce a concentration of power. His restructuring of the Pentagon, marked by the dismissal of high-ranking officials and a leadership overhaul, suggests a recalibration of U.S. military doctrine. This shift away from traditional consensus-building mechanisms toward unilateral decision-making introduces volatility in civil-military relations, a factor often associated with governance models that prioritise executive dominance over institutional balance.
Trade as a Mechanism of Coercion and Conflict Escalation
Trump has increasingly instrumentalised trade wars and broader economic policies to advance geopolitical goals and project influence. Tariff impositions on Canadian imports have already triggered a diplomatic feud, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau denouncing the move as an act of economic hostility. The Canadian case, which highlights the transactional approach of Trump’s policy, reflects a broader economic confrontation strategy that has been applied to other countries, such as China, Mexico, and South Korea. The context of escalating tariff regimes and supply chain disruptions, occasioned by Trump’s approach, risks exacerbating global economic instability and potentially precipitating a recession. Historically, economic downturns have been catalysts for political unrest and inter-state tensions.
Strategic Disengagement and the Reshaping of Global Conflict Landscapes
Trump’s foreign policy doctrine, characterised by retrenchment from multilateralism, is fundamentally altering the dynamics of global conflict. The decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO) represents a paradigmatic shift, diminishing U.S. influence in global health governance and creating a power vacuum that China and Russia are poised to fill. The absence of U.S. funding threatens the operational effectiveness of disease prevention programs, a development with potential implications for biosecurity and public health resilience.
In conflict zones such as Gaza, Ukraine, and Syria, Trump’s policies are reshaping strategic calculations. His administration’s disengagement from traditional alliance structures and emphasis on bilateral, interest-driven engagements could embolden actors seeking to exploit power vacuums. The shifting geopolitical landscape suggests the potential for increased proxy conflicts, as regional powers adjust to a recalibrated international order where U.S. involvement is less predictable.
Implications for Global Stability and Conflict Forecasting
Looking ahead, Trump’s governance trajectory suggests a systemic transformation in both domestic and international conflict patterns. Domestically, the erosion of institutional checks and deepening societal divisions increase the likelihood of internal political unrest. Internationally, the retreat from multilateral engagement and reliance on economic coercion as a strategic tool heightens the risk of trade disputes escalating into broader geopolitical confrontations.
If current trends persist, the post-2025 global order may witness an accelerated shift toward multipolarity, with China and Russia solidifying their roles as counterweights to U.S. hegemony. This reconfiguration presents both risks and opportunities: while it may dilute American unilateralism, it could also lead to increased unpredictability in global conflict resolution mechanisms.
Ultimately, Trump’s legacy will not merely be one of disruption but of strategic recalibration—a test of whether the international system can adapt to a landscape where traditional power structures are increasingly focused on a particular region or theme.