Unmasking the Neoroyalist Nature of Trump's Foreign Policy

Understanding Trump's Foreign Policy Paradigm

Negotiations over President Trump's controversial demand for U.S. ownership of Greenland have left officials from Denmark and Greenland baffled. Many perceived this as mere chaos or a retrofitted version of historical great-power competition. Yet, as I delve into the intricacies of this neoroyalist approach, it becomes evident that Mr. Trump's foreign policy transcends traditional paradigms.

President Emmanuel Macron of France succinctly expressed the global misunderstanding: “I do not understand what you are doing on Greenland.”

For many, the disarray apparent in Trump's foreign engagements seems irrational. But framing his actions through a historical lens that extends beyond the chaos reveals a deliberate strategy—one that seeks to prioritize elites over traditional national interests

The Rise of Neoroyalism

The essence of neoroyalism lies in a paradigm shift—foreign policy morphing into a conduit for wealth and status for Trump and an inner circle of associates. National interests are increasingly sacrificed on the altar of corporate and personal enrichment.

No longer is the U.S. competing with rivals to assert power; instead, Trump seems willing to collaborate with them to bolster his own standing. This behavior does not merely erode the longstanding rules-based international order; it actively dismantles it. As I observed in earlier analyses, the implications are grave.

Chaotic Impulses and Eroding Norms

For decades, the U.S. has championed an international order predicated on rules. Mr. Trump has consistently wielded a wrecking ball to this carefully constructed edifice, infamously proclaiming, “I don't need international law.” Many have mistakenly framed his actions as a return to 19th-century models of international politics, like the Monroe Doctrine. However, the current trajectory is unsettlingly distinctive.

Instead of safeguarding U.S. interests by countering drug trafficking, for instance, Trump's focus on Venezuela illustrates an incoherent strategy. One minute he chastises an authoritarian regime, while the next he pardons former leaders involved in the very drug trade he purports to combat.

Elitism Over Equality

Today, America's foreign policy is wielded less like a diplomatic tool and more like royal decree. An exclusive network of influence governs it, reminiscent of ancient courts. Key figures in Trump's administration exhibit ambivalent ties: from cabinet members to significant campaign donors. Such relationships yield stark parallels to historical oligarchies.

As these parallel structures shape policy, the focus on national benefit dissipates, allowing profits to funnel disproportionally to Trump and his allies.

This method of governance ensures that large sectors of the American public are sidelined, creating a stark chasm between elite interests and the populace's well-being. When Trump claims that U.S. intervention in Venezuela will enhance prosperity, the reality often veers sharply from this optimistic projection.

The Danger of Neoroyalism

Viewing Trump's foreign policy through this neoroyalist lens aids in understanding its disturbing coherence. The trends are not merely isolated incidents; they reflect a calculated strategy to promulgate discord under the guise of national interest.

Most troubling is how other nations are responding to Trump's leadership—as they vie for favor, they risk entrenching patterns that affirm rather than oppose such neoroyalism. This perilous trend engenders an environment where extraction and dominance replace cooperative global governance.

Resisting the Trend

To counteract the tide of neoroyalism, a coherent alternative must emerge. Countries, including allies, need to mobilize vigorously against Trump's tendencies. A potential agreement between the European Union and the Mercosur bloc illustrates how collective action can serve not only their shared interests but also stem the flow towards concentrated power.

In a world where Trump gestures towards a Hapsburg-like reign, the stakes over international norms have never been higher. The consequences of acquiescing to this shift could lead to an unprecedented era of extraction that threatens not only global stability but humanity itself.

Conclusion: A Call for Accountability

The reality is undeniable: neoroyalism prioritizes the interests of a privileged few over broader humanitarian goals. To foster durable stability and justice worldwide, it is crucial that we resist these regressive trends and advocate for a return to a rules-based international order that serves all nations, not just the privileged few.