The election of Donald Trump as the next US president has shifted the dynamics of domestic and foreign policy in the United States. His re-election means the world will see Trump executing the policies that characterized his first term. He comes along with a cocktail of nationalism and protectionism which has the potential to jolt the way in which US home affairs are run as well as its place on the global stage.

People worldwide had followed the contest between Trump and Kamala Harris. Many Democratic Party supporters, particularly among women and minorities, wanted to ensure that Trump did not return to the White House. Still, the American voters chose Trump in a reaction to the economic policies adopted by President Joe Biden.

His promise to slash spending on foreign aid, end the Ukraine war and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and finally make America’s interests rather than international responsibility a priority again attracted the voters.

The race underscored that the foreign policy issues were not of pressing concern to the Americans whose own economic woes and apprehensions over immigration dominated the ballot. This shift seems to fit in an even larger trend of preferring internal stability over international influence. Hence, the “America First” agenda resonated with them in these circumstances. His promise to slash spending on foreign aid, end the Ukraine war and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and finally make America’s interests rather than international responsibility a priority again attracted the voters who considered the recent US foreign policies a failure.

Also read: Triumph of Populism: What Trump’s Win Means For World Order

Domestically, Trump is expected to further cement his nationalist and protectionist position, a hallmark of his first term. His policy focus on the economy will be protection of America’s industry with new tariffs and trade restrictions, largely against the Chinese items. As far as immigration is concerned, he will focus on curtailing entry into the United States, an issue that has been projected as the reason behind unemployment as well as a social burden. Yet another potential impact of Trump’s policies will be deregulation in every sector, leading to weakened environmental requirements and low levels of government role.

Perhaps, the most obvious winners in the context of a second term for Trump are the American businessmen, especially tech giants, manufacturers, energy providers and agriculturists. This is primarily because his policy agenda calls for tax cuts and lower levels of strict regulatory barriers. Most of the people within the corporate circles consider Trump’s strategy a panacea for reenergizing domestic production and thus reducing dependency on imports, especially from China. It attracts the middle-class and working-class Americans as well, promising economic expansion and, hence, more jobs and industrialization.

During the Biden administration, tensions have been mounting between the US and the Arab world, especially the Gulf States, on matters related to energy and human rights. His renewed emphasis on Iran’s nuclear deal and focusing more on aspects of human rights put him at loggerheads with long-standing Middle Eastern friends, namely Saudi Arabia.

Perhaps, the most obvious winners in the context of a second term for Trump are the American businessmen, especially tech giants, manufacturers, energy providers and agriculturists.

On the other hand, Trump has been historically warmed towards the Arab monarchies, marked by full support for Saudi Arabia and the UAE. And this approach may signify a realignment of US-Middle East relations during his rule. Trump’s re-election may be accompanied by stronger ties with the Arab nations, especially those wanting stability and security guarantees.

Meanwhile, the Russia-Ukraine war has been a contentious issue in US foreign policy. The Biden administration provided billions of dollars in financial and military aid to Ukraine, which became controversial in the United States, with people arguing why foreign aid should be prioritized over domestic needs. In his campaign, Trump promised to put an end to the war by negotiating directly with Kyiv and Moscow. To many Americans, Trump’s stance to slash financial support to Ukraine strengthened the belief that the American taxpayers’ dollars could be better directed towards the pressing national needs, in complete contrast to Biden.

However, the most salient feature of Trump’s foreign policy template, which may prove decisive for the US allies in Europe, is his position on NATO. Trump has often criticized NATO while arguing that other member countries should bear greater burden to finance the defense structures. It means his second term is going to squeeze the NATO allies even further in terms of finances. A strategy on these lines will eventually lead to a diminished United States engagement in European security – a scenario being viewed by NATO allies with some fear as to whether they need to pump in more defense spending and enhance their capabilities. A diminished US engagement will upset the NATO cohesion and make the European countries turn towards new alliances or fortify regional security structures on their own.

The most salient feature of Trump’s foreign policy template, which may prove decisive for the US allies in Europe, is his position on NATO.

At the same time, policies with regards to China will revolve around continuation of trade war and restrictions in terms of technology in a manner that would further slow the economic and technological ascent of China. This is his administration’s Indo-Pacific strategy to counterbalance China’s influence, especially in Southeast Asia and the South China Sea, bonding more with the likes of Japan, India, and Australia.

In his second term, Trump may further impose economic sanctions on Chinese companies, limit Chinese investments in American technology sectors, and support regional allies to contain Beijing’s influence.

Meanwhile, while framing China as a competitor of the United States, the Trump administration will make defense collaboration with the Indo-Pacific countries stronger. His stance on Taiwan is expected further strain the Sino-US relations if he decides to provide symbolic support to Taipei.

However, Trump’s anti-China policy can face some resistance within the United States from those American businesses that rely on Chinese market, which may cause frictions between domestic economic interests.

The first Trump presidency also saw a first: the diplomatic approach it adopted on the North Korean issue, resulting in a meeting with Kim Jong-un. There may be renewed direct negotiations and a continued expression of an economic reward in exchange for a denuclearization pledge from North Korea. No one is in a position to determine the outcome of Trump’s unconventional approach to tackle North Korea in case he decides to repeat the same. Whereas prior administrations have adopted a more collective approach with respect to the North Korea policy, Trump is unique in his strategy of emphasizing more on one-on-one negotiations rather than collaborative pressure through the international community.

Maintaining his current suspicion towards the region due to the ever-increasing closeness with China, Trump can even make the Pak-US relations strained.

Previously, Trump’s relationship with Pakistan was defined largely by the United States’ decision to withdraw from Afghanistan and how Islamabad played a strategic role in supporting peace efforts. This time round, his government is expected to be more alienated while focusing on counterterrorism, thus reducing the US footprint in South Asia. Maintaining his current suspicion towards the region due to the ever-increasing closeness with China, Trump can even make the Pak-US relations strained. However, his transactional behavior may revive cooperation if both sides realize that it is a mutually beneficial deal, be it counterterrorism or economic investments.

There is no doubt that Trump’s second term will negate the cooperative framework for international cooperation and seek bilateral agreements that serve the American interests. His skepticism of multilateral institutions, such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization, is well-known. This leads us to two possibilities: a decrease in US funding or withdrawal from some agencies. It may also involve climate change, arms control and trade agreements.

In global conflicts, Trump may use a deal-oriented approach that will minimize US military involvement. His willingness to mediate high-profile disputes – like the Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine conflicts, reflects his “hands-on” and “deal-oriented” foreign policy. This approach will enable Trump to focus on his “much-vaunted record” of his first term, emphasizing that he is a diplomat who avoids wars. But it could also indicate selective actions, whereby all other wars are disregarded because they are not relevant to the immediate US interests.

Given that Trump stands for the “America First” slogan, the US will see a recalibration of its relations with various nations. The idea is to have US domestic interests ahead of international responsibilities. His posture towards China and Russia, and unconventional North Korea approach form the bottom line of a shift that revolves around a transactional foreign policy instead of multilateralism. Although the promise to stop the wars may please the frustrated American voters, it will cause an increased unpredictability for the US allies, thus weakening the US influence and redefining the patterns of international power structures.

As Trump’s administration becomes even more protectionist and nationalist at home, the US it presents to the world can become more complicated, dividing people within and abroad. Such reorientation by the US in complex international relations will force profound shifts toward greater global tensions, trade issues and security concerns. There will be a long walk on this unpredictable path under the leadership of American diplomacy for the US allies and enemies alike.