With Donald Trump winning the 2024 presidential election, the Republican president will make his choices for the cabinet. Marco Rubio for Secretary of State, Pete Hegsett for Secretary of Defense, John Ratcliffe for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director, and Mike Waltz for National Security Advisor have been Trump’s final picks so far. The question is how do each of these members think about America’s current issues in the world.

America First And National Conservatism:

If Trump had a conflict with traditional neoconservatives and evangelicals during his first term, he can now go ahead with his plans more easily. Therefore, the world will witness a “one-voice cabinet”.

The foreign policy team members have all declared their loyalty to Trump’s ideas. None of them believe that America will resort to costly alliances or military interventions to spread its values. The most important example of not believing in the non-partisan strategy of liberal hegemony can be seen in Trump and his new cabinet’s view of the Ukraine war. All the new members are against the military aid to Ukraine and are in favor of improving relations with Russia.

China, The Most Important Threat To America:

Four years ago, Ratcliffe stated in a note in the Wall Street Journal that China is the number 1 threat to the United States, whose goal is military, economic and technological dominance over the United States and the whole world. The confrontation of the current generation of Americans with China is similar to the confrontation with German fascism and the Soviet Iron Wall.

Also read: A Looming Storm: Trump’s Far-Right Cabinet And The Fragile World Order

Although prioritizing the emerging power of China among the ruling elites in America is trans-partisan, it cannot be denied that the approach of the future American government is different from that of looking at China as a competitor. The views of people like Ratcliffe should be seen alongside the options of the Treasury Department, who want a more intense trade war with China. Of course, it is unclear how much the American government will be able to fight a trade war with China.

Deterrence Against Iran:

As much as the Trumpists want to reduce America’s involvement in the world and focus on China, the issue of the Middle East is completely different. Trump’s foreign policy team is strongly anti-Iran. This team believes that if the resistance axis targets America’s interests in the region, a strong military response should be given to maintain America’s deterrence. They believe that experience has proven that if Iran and the axis of resistance are dealt a strong military blow, they will retreat to preserve the system.

This dangerous perception becomes more important when it is accompanied by sensitivity about Iran’s nuclear program. Waltz recently stated that a ceasefire in Gaza is not the final solution and that Israel should focus on Iran.

Hexett also said in an interview that “I don’t want occupation, I don’t want endless war. But Iran has been in an endless war with us for 40 years. Either we stop it now or we wait, come back to the [negotiating] table and let them continue to develop their capabilities.” He said earlier that “we should allow Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities”. Maybe in the long run, America will return to the approach of maximum pressure instead of military confrontation; But from the point of view of the Trump team, the current war in the region has opened this window for America to solve the nuclear issue of Iran forever.

America And Israel:

Trump distancing himself from neoconservatives and evangelicals does not mean Trump distancing himself from Israel. Looking at Trump’s campaign financiers, as well as some members of the foreign policy team (Rubio and Waltz), one can understand the extent to which the Israel lobby has influence in the cabinet.

The Trump administration will continue to fully support Israel and not exert pressure, especially in a war that will determine the future security order of the region. America and Israel agree on the continuation of the war until achieving a strategic victory against the axis of resistance. Almost all the members of the national security team believe that America should leave Israel’s hand free to attack Iran and the axis of resistance.

On the one hand, the unanimity of views in Trump’s cabinet and the members following the president means that he is more predictable than in 2016, which is a positive point for Iran. However, on the other hand, it makes Trump’s foreign policy less volatile. It Trump wants to make dangerous decisions, then it is unlikely that those around him will be able to restrain him like in the first term. This is not good news for America which is in a much more challenging and critical world than 2016.