Foreign policy is a complex field where success depends on understanding both allies and adversaries. Predicting rival actions often requires deep insight into their leaders, motivations, and centuries-old historical grievances. With this knowledge, events like the Russo-Ukraine War become predictable. In this article we will examine President-Elect Donald J. Trump’s foreign policy, we see that his approach as a businessman creates a uniquely effective strategy in today’s world. Breaking the norms that often are associated with Foreign Policy.

Trump’s foreign policy can be described as unorthodox, especially among traditional "foreign policy experts." For decades, U.S. foreign policy has been dominated by "hawks," favoring aggressive and direct actions. Trump disrupted this approach — but how? To understand, let’s define two terms: hawks and doves. Hawks are aggressive, favoring assertive policies, while doves advocate for peace. Trump can be described as a “smart hawk.” Although many in the MAGA world criticize hawkish policies, foreign policy is rarely black and white. Hawks aren’t always the bad guys, and Trump’s unique brand of hawkishness is distinctive.

Most hawks act boldly, aiming to overpower opponents without compromise or strategic foresight. A recent example is Europe and America’s response to Russia in the Russo-Ukraine War. By providing extensive aid to Ukraine and sanctioning Russia, Western hawks hoped to weaken Russia quickly. Instead, Russia has maintained steady territorial gains, increased war production, continued selling oil and goods internationally, and strengthened ties with countries like Iran and North Korea. As a result, Western nations have lost leverage, exhausting resources without achieving their goal, illustrating how the hawkish approach often fails to anticipate the broader, long-term impact. The main fault with most Hawks is that looking two steps ahead is a herculean task. Many rush into Foreign Policy head first and fail to understand that diplomacy is objectively the better path in nearly every possible world. It is through discussion and talking that the world of Foreign Policy prevents wars, but it is almost important to not be an empty threat either as with every good business discussion, personal discussion, or foreign policy, leverage = power.

The Soviet-era idiom “China’s final warning” underscores a core weakness that often afflicts Hawk's foreign policy: issuing repetitive threats without the power or will to enforce them diminishes credibility. This dynamic is especially evident among hawkish policymakers who make bold threats but lack the leverage or foresight to follow through effectively. This pattern often results in prolonged conflicts or the continuous stationing of American troops far from our allies, draining resources and putting lives at risk. Trump, however, shattered this approach by leveraging his unpredictability and genuine ability to deliver on his words. Unlike traditional politicians, he kept global adversaries guessing, and his threats carried weight because he operated outside conventional norms. With hawks in his administration, Trump could leverage traditional power stances without being tied to the rigid actions typically associated with hawkishness.

Under Trump, hawkish foreign policy didn’t entail unchecked aggression but was strategically aimed at achieving peace. For instance, he made a significant move by withdrawing from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, ensuring the U.S. could keep pace with Russia and China in nuclear armaments. His stance towards Iran was equally assertive. Rather than following the Obama administration’s approach of incentivizing Iran through economic concessions, Trump implemented sanctions that actively curbed Iran's nuclear capabilities. He further isolated Iran diplomatically by building strong alliances across the Middle East, leaving Iran with few avenues for meaningful partnerships. The decisive act of targeting and eliminating Iranian General Qasem Soleimani underscored this approach. Unlike other hawks who might have responded with broader military strikes that could drag the U.S. into a costly war, Trump’s carefully calculated action sent a crystal-clear message: America would not tolerate threats without consequence. He even outlined 52 cultural and military sites as potential targets if Iran chose to retaliate, signaling serious deterrence. This kind of assertiveness worked precisely because Trump’s reputation lent his threats credibility, while his unique style meant he knew exactly when to pull back and stabilize the situation.

One of Trump’s signature achievements was achieving a semblance of peace with North Korea, simply by engaging in direct diplomacy and establishing rapport with its leaders. In dealing with authoritarian regimes, personal relations and respect play a crucial role, and Trump understood this well. He was also quick to evaluate and adjust America's role in international affairs, understanding when alliances or military engagements were no longer productive. He recognized the diminishing returns of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, where after nearly 15 years, the Taliban controlled large swathes of the country. Although a full congressional approval to exit took time, Trump knew the cost of staying outweighed the benefits. A similar situation unfolded in northern Syria with the Kurdish forces. With Turkey poised to enter the region to neutralize Kurdish groups and pursue remaining ISIS fighters, Trump’s withdrawal of American troops saved lives and allowed other powers to shoulder the regional burden. The end result? Turkey faced off against Kurdish forces backed by Russia and Syria while the U.S. watched from the sidelines, a strategic win at zero cost to American resources. This move stands in stark contrast to the West’s recent actions in Ukraine, where unmeasured support and aggressive sanctions against Russia have squandered leverage. Trump’s approach, by comparison, showed a balanced application of leverage that left America in a stronger position.

As we look to a potential second Trump term, having hawkish figures in his administration isn’t inherently problematic. Trump has shown a unique ability to harness the strengths of hawkish advisors without adopting their rigid, confrontational methods. His blend of assertiveness and business acumen has made America stronger and safer while promoting U.S. dominance on the world stage. In a world where traditional leverage has been diminished—especially with the Biden administration and NATO’s handling of Eastern Europe—Trump’s focus will likely shift to areas where he can maximize impact. The future of U.S. foreign policy under Trump could usher in a renewed era of Abraham Accords in the Middle East, with a focus on harmony in the region, where Trump’s distinct skill set allows him to thrive. Simultaneously, China may face the first volleys of economic pressure, testing its resolve. Relations with North Korea will likely return to a calm state, as Trump’s personal rapport will be reestablished. Globally, conflicts are likely to simmer down, or at least proceed with little risk to America, as Trump's approach is guided by leverage, respect, and practicality, prioritizing U.S. interests with minimal cost and maximal strategic gain.