Donald Trump, American Imperialist

Restraint had a nice rhetorical run.

Photo by Daniel on Unsplash

One of the ruefully amusing claims of the Trump 2024 campaign for the past two years was that compared to other recent presidents, Trump demonstrated foreign policy restraint. As I noted last year, “the conventional wisdom during the Trump years was that Trump was far more dovish than his foreign policy advisors; even [in 2023], some observers continue to insist this remains true.” At best this claim was dubious and at worst it was unadulterated horseshit. I will keep saying this in print and on podcasts: “Trump is not an isolationist — he is a mercantilist who prefers using force in this hemisphere.”

And it’s not just me. A recent International Security paper on the many different schools of thought in the restraint camp noted, “Elected in 2016, President Donald Trump did not adopt a grand strategy of restraint, but he did voice restrainers’ concerns about alliances and adopt some policies that restrainers applauded…. Since then, Republicans have adopted a platform that includes calls for a stronger military as well as restraint-friendly themes, such as using force ‘sparingly.’” In other words, Trump might have sounded like he was sympathetic to restraint, but in practice he acted in a more Jacksonian manner.

All of this was when Trump was running for office. As president-elect, Trump has had zero problems brandishing coercive threats against trading partners and the BRICS nations. Sometimes those coercive threats sounded pretty militaristic. For example, last month in World Politics Review James Bosworth noted Trump’s increased bellicosity towards Mexico:

Having now won re-election, Trump appears to be moving toward a more aggressive use of the U.S. military at the border to combat migration, and his advisers are also building a case for cross-border military operations into Mexico. In other words, the signs are that the incoming Trump administration is preparing for an actual war against the drug cartels in 2025 that goes well beyond the “War on Drugs” of the past.

Over the past week, however, Trump has been making noises suggesting something altogether stranger and more aggressive: the territorial expansion of the United States.

Think I’m exaggerating? Let’s consider some recent Trump reflections about Canada. He has repeatedly mused out loud about the Great White North becoming the 51st state. On social media he has been belittling Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau by calling him “Governor” and describing Canada as a “state.” On Wednesday he posted, “No one can answer why we subsidize Canada to the tune of over $100,000,000 a year? Makes no sense! Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State. They would save massively on taxes and military protection. I think it is a great idea. 51st State!!!”

Now one can dismiss this as Trump trolling Justin Trudeau — needlessly counterproductive but also much ado about nothing. Except that Trump has also been talking about claiming other territories as well. As Reuters’ Gram Slattery explains:

President-elect Donald Trump threatened to reassert U.S. control over the Panama Canal on Sunday, accusing Panama of charging excessive rates to use the Central American passage and drawing a sharp rebuke from Panamanian President Jose Raul Mulino.

Speaking to a crowd of supporters in Arizona, Trump also said he would not let the canal fall into the "wrong hands," warning of potential Chinese influence on the passage.

After the event, he posted an image on Truth Social of an American flag flying over a narrow body of water, with the comment: "Welcome to the United States Canal!"….

Trump's comments were an exceedingly rare example of a U.S. leader saying he could push a sovereign country to hand over territory. They also underlined an expected shift in U.S. diplomacy under Trump, who has not historically shied away from threatening allies and using bellicose rhetoric when dealing with counterparts….

In a recorded message released by Panama's President Mulino on Sunday afternoon, the nation's leader said that Panama's independence was non-negotiable and that China had no influence on the canal's administration. He also defended the passage rates Panama charged, saying they were not set "on a whim".

China does not control or administer the canal, but a subsidiary of Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings has long managed two ports located on the canal's Caribbean and Pacific entrances…..

"Every square meter of the Panama Canal and the surrounding area belongs to Panama and will continue belonging (to Panama)," Mulino said in his statement, which was released on X.

Trump then responded to Mulino: "We'll see about that!"

Then there is Greenland. Some readers might recall that during his first term Trump tried to buy Greenland, or trade Puerto Rico for it. In announcing Ken Howery as his Ambassador to Denmark, Trump added, “for purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.” So I guess that’s on the table again.

Trump trolling one jurisdiction is just Trump sounding on brand. Trump talking about Canada, Mexico, the Panama Canal, and Greenland like he wants to annex them is a bit different.

The hard-working staff here at Drezner’s World is skeptical that Trump will go beyond threats and tweets when it comes to the whiter countries Canada and Greenland. Sometimes bluster and trolling is just bluster and trolling: obnoxious but meaningless. Trump might threaten tariffs to get what he wants, but even with allies, economic coercion does not yield successful land grabs.

When it comes to Mexico or the Panama Canal, however, it is hard to believe that Trump will back down. I sure don’t see Marco Rubio trying to talk him out of it. As I noted in the New York Times, “Mr. Rubio’s own hawkishness will mesh well with the MAGA view on Latin America; expect to see lots of American force used in that region.”

We will have to see how this plays out after January 20, 2025. It might amount to nothing. But I cannot escape the sense that those pundits who really believed that Donald Trump was going to embrace restraint in foreign policy have been played for fools.