America First, Allies Second: The Global Stakes Of Trump’s Approach To Russia

The possible reactivation of the Trump administration's power presents a number of questions for the future of the U.S.-Russia relations, at a time when the conflict surrounding the Russia-Ukraine war is making it all the more complex. Historically, Donald Trump's presidency demonstrated an unconventional approach to geopolitics, often challenging established norms. His rhetoric on Russia was a mixture of tough talk and undiluted, even apparent, admiration for Vladimir Putin, a combination that could also have a huge impact on the world stage should he return to the White House. As the Russian invasion of Ukraine destabilizes the world to the detriment of stability, the consequences of Trump's possible policy alterations cannot be overestimated. As of early 2025, the war in Ukraine has claimed tens of thousands of lives, displaced millions, and cost the global economy over $1 trillion, underscoring the war's catastrophic impact.

Sanctions imposed by the West have crippled the Russian economy, slashing its GDP by approximately 2.1% in 2022 and cutting its access to over $300 billion in foreign reserves. However, Trump has repeatedly pushed against sanctions as ineffective, promising on an earlier term that diplomacy should "make deals, not enemies" and his possible re-election may express a change of approach to the United States' handling of Russia's aggression. Critics also contend that this could result in relaxing some sanctions in return for compromises, a controversial tactic when considering the crimes committed in Ukraine. Yet proponents hope that it may help to clear the way for a dialogue leading to a ceasefire or at the very least a relative stabilization of the fighting.

Making this even more complicated is Trump's past claim that "Europe has to make its fair share", a position that he has used to put pressure on NATO members to boost defense budgets. This rhetoric, while resonating with his domestic base, could alienate key European partners during a time when transatlantic unity is crucial to counter Russian aggression. In the meantime, the EU continues to be severely affected by the war, and member states are desperately trying to disentangle their energy supplies and lessen the Russian gas dependency. By 2023 Russian natural gas deliveries to the EU had virtually disappeared by 90%, an enormously significant change that has sent energy prices through the roof and has obliged countries to invest heavily in alternative sources of energy.

To put it in a tangential way, Trump's dream of buying Greenland and his snarky remarks about Canada have already raised eyebrows internationally. While these comments might align with his penchant for hyperbole, they underline his willingness to challenge established norms in international relations. These comments were often dismissed as outlandish, they reflect an undercurrent of strategic ambition that could manifest in surprising ways during a second term. For its as yet unexplored mineral resources, and with its location in the Arctic, Greenland is both a powerful geopolitical asset, and, aided by global warming, a new shipping channel opens up in the Arctic. Alarmingly, the contentious trade rivalry and defense expenditures between the Trump administration and Canada indicated a possibility of a rekindled tension, and this may exacerbate North American alliances.

One must also consider Trump's unpredictable relationship with Putin. Although some have labelled Trump as excessively accommodating to the Russian counterpart, his administration took sanctions against Moscow, and even expelled the Russian diplomats after the allegations of election manipulation. But Trump, to his credit, famously stated, "Getting along with Russia is a positive thing, not a negative one," a sentiment that embodies his pragmatic approach to the world. The potential for rapprochement with Russia could have ripple effects on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, possibly leading to pressure on Kyiv to accept unfavorable terms for peace. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, whose leadership bestrides both resilience and disillusionment, may now experience diminished U.S. support, a consequence with the potential to change the course of the war.

The wider consequences of a potential Trump comeback go beyond Russia. His "America First" doctrine stands in opposition to classical liberal internationalism, stressing sovereignty and bilateral arrangements over multilateralism. Although this strategy may be attractive to nationalist feelings in the U.S., it could risk diminishing alliances and relinquishing power to competitors such as China and Russia. The situation is especially acute in Eastern Europe where membership in NATO has served as a counterweight to the Russian expansionist appetites. Any sense that US commitment is inconsistent could embolden Moscow, destabilizing that segment of the region even more.

Trump's presidency, if it materializes, will undoubtedly bring a recalibration of U.S. foreign policy. Whether this results in de-escalation or further chaos depends on his ability to navigate the fine line between diplomacy and deterrence. The saying is attributed to the late U.K. Prime Minister Winston Churchill, "To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war" can be seen here, summarizing the careful tradeoff made in dealing with a resurgent Russia. The global community, already strained by war, economic upheaval, and shifting power dynamics, will watch closely as the U.S. charts its course under Trump's potential leadership. The choices coming out of Washington may usher in a more stable global system or exacerbate the cleavages that risk tearing it at the seams.