Blog

IHA Lecture, 27/03 THE NEW INTERNATIONAL ORDER UNDER DONALD TRUMP

By Maria Negreponti-Delivani                    

Introduction

Global changes are announced as sweeping, although they have not yet taken their final form.

We will be concerned, initially, tonight, with the change in the international economic system, which has already begun, but is now being completed with the election of the new planet's leader. From an extreme form of globalization, that is, it is evolving into protectionism, with the main weapon being the imposition of tariffs.

It should be noted that these two systems of international trade alternate approximately every 50 years. Their alternation is due to the fact that, towards the end of the 50 years, their disadvantages outweigh their advantages. It is, necessarily, a combined application of both, in which one prevails over the other.

Let me remind you that globalization was imposed by the US, which tried at the time to neutralize the risk of its marginalization by Europe or Japan, which were developing at a very rapid pace. And the result was, in addition to the multiple problems and the peak of inequalities, the rise of China, which is already threatening America's global primacy.

Needless to say, both systems have advantages and disadvantages, and the problem is what each of them seeks to achieve, and how it is implemented.

In the case of protectionism, which is returning with Trump, there is an originality: namely, that this system is, in principle, compatible with state interventionism, and not extreme liberalism. However, one of the first relevant messages, in the US, seems to be that economic liberalism prevails, as serious cuts to the public sector have already begun.

Secondly, the main characteristics of the new planetary ruler's government classify it in the category of non-systemic, non-traditional governments. Governments where, across the planet, in recent years, new government formations have been displacing traditional ones. And that is why, out of reaction and panic, the traditional remaining governments are calling the new government formations populist and far-right. Which, in relation to the latter characterization, namely far-right, sometimes corresponds to reality, and sometimes not, while the first, namely populism, is indeed unclear as to what exactly it includes.

However, the dominant feature of the Trump administration, which could not have been achieved by any other administration, is, as everything shows, the abolition of the rules that, after World War II, regulate the relations and conflicts of individual states. This is international law and individual international organizations.

In the two main Parts of my speech, I will refer, first, to the new international economic order, and its expected consequences, while in the second Part to the new international political order.

Part I. The new international economic order

The dominant characteristic of the new planetarch, in the economic sector, is perfectly expressed by “America First” and “America Will Be Great Again”. Statements that have not changed since his first term as planetarch. However, the measures and methods of achieving them have changed. In these two wishes, indifference to how every other country on the planet is doing stands out. And the absolutely sincere, albeit indirect, confession that the measures that will be taken to achieve this goal are aimed exclusively and solely at the interests of America.

The measures

These measures, which have already surfaced, are first of all the imposition of tariffs, which it is understood will be chosen with the sole interest of the US in mind, the significant reduction in defense spending, the strengthening of self-sufficiency in many critical sectors, the reduction of the trade deficit, but also the closed borders for immigrants. The implementation of the above goals is expected to be helped, most likely, by the depreciation of the dollar, which will make American products cheaper.

Tariffs are directed towards the entire outside world, targeting, as the case may be, goods from each country or coalition of countries, which, among other things:

* behave annoyingly, according to Trump,

* With the EU in particular, as has become clear, Trump is angry, for a number of reasons, including, among others, because it does not accept the existence of non-systemic governments, because it does not pay its share of NATO debts, but also because it does not buy enough American cars and agricultural products, resulting in a trade deficit in America of the order of $300 million.

Trump also appears convinced that the EU was created to destroy America and that is why he wants to humiliate and punish it, something he has already done many times, starting with the invitations to his inauguration, and beyond.

But, beyond all the other things that show indifference, disrespect, and even an intention to degrade the EU, the EU was a mere observer in Trump's apparently cordial talks with Putin about ending the war in Ukraine. How else could Trump show more disrespect for the EU?

Of course, this behavior of Trump against the EU is justified, at least in part, by the EU's light-heartedness, which turned against him in a thousand ways before his election. Not wanting to understand that in the decadent West, and especially in America, there were only two candidates for the presidency, and therefore the election was only between these two.

About customs duties

Let's say a few words about tariffs. Tariffs cause, in principle, inflation, which burdens consumers. But it may not if the economy that imposes them manages to intensify its activity. Furthermore, in some cases, the imposition of tariffs may result in limiting the price of goods on which they have been imposed, if producers decide to limit their offer price. Furthermore, the imposition of tariffs may aim at protecting productive sectors of national importance within the country. And, of course, the imposition of tariffs causes retaliation in tariffs.

Whether or not the imposition of tariffs is justified depends on what is sought through their imposition. In particular, America, as it seems, is going back quite a bit in time, bringing back the theory of Friedrich List, according to which tariffs help the effort to industrialize the economy, away from competition. Today, it is accepted that no country that industrialized in the past would have succeeded without imposing tariffs on its imports. And precisely, as much as it is debatable, whether a country, already industrialized, can engage in this effort again in the 21^ο century, Trump seems to have decided that it is possible. And he is not the only one, because the EU is also facing it, as a reaction to Chinese exports. 

Although Trump is not at all interested in the effects of imposing tariffs on the rest of the world, it is nevertheless predicted that they will limit global growth by around 2%.

For Greece, which is in a state of cancer, it will suffer a slight deterioration anyway, given that its exports to the US are low. However, under certain conditions, which are already likely to occur, namely if our country ceases to be obliged to follow excessive austerity and globalization within the EU. Greece, then, would have the chance to normalize its economy, protected by tariffs, and away from competition, and no longer overwhelmingly dependent on the tertiary sector, precisely thanks to the help of tariff imposition.

A look at the potential impact of tariffs on the EU 

The EU, even without Trump's tariffs, is in a dire position, mainly because of its bad decisions in the Ukraine war. In general, it could not or did not want to understand that sanctions against Russia would destroy it, while helping Russia to be the only European country with a relatively high growth rate, despite the war. The tariffs risk being a very dangerous blow against the EU, although some hopes are visible on the horizon. And this is because Trump seems not to be interested in the EU, because at the present stage he is not able to offer it anything significant, but also mainly because in the long term its population is shrinking at a dangerous rate.

I will refer to some already emerging reactions against Trump's tariffs, which will potentially limit their adverse impact on the rest of the world, and help the EU not collapse:

* Mexico and Canada are already seeking to intensify their trade relations with the EU, and so is China.

*Regarding China, against which the tariffs are mainly aimed, I should note that Trump has ceased to speak out against it with his old vehemence.

I would say that through tariffs, America seeks to gain time in order to increase its degree of self-sufficiency in mainly high-tech items, but also to attempt new industrialization, and at the same time, of course, to deal a blow to China.

China's response is to pursue closer trade relations with the EU, and it certainly has the rising demand for its own products from the BRICS. The tariffs, moreover, are not expected to harm China to a great extent, which is implementing a plan to increase domestic demand, recruiting for the first time in its history also services, the demand for which has always been at a lower rate compared to the rest of the world, while they have already increased significantly.

The stock market reaction to the announcement of a trade war was strongly negative, but it is not expected to last.

However, beyond individual opinions and predictions, let me remind you that the final consequences of a trade war are unpredictable and naturally different for each economy that participates in it.

The EU is arming itself

In this unfavorable situation, and unlike Trump, who seems not to expect wars, because their possible outbreak obviously depends on his own decisions, the EU has decided to arm itself. And this, in spite of its poor economic situation, due to which it was apparently not possible to start implementing the Draghi plan, which aimed at its recovery through industrialization. Precisely the amount of the Draghi plan, which was to go to improve its economic situation, and had been estimated at 800 billion Euros, although this amount has not yet been secured, was decided to be allocated to its defense. This convulsive, as it seems, decision of the EU is obviously due to Trump's clear willingness to continue to guarantee, through NATO, the security of the EU. Especially since NATO's presence will be unnecessary in a world, peaceful and without wars, in the form that Trump seems to want to impose. But how will the EU pay for this equipment, obviously, without hoping for help from America? In any case, it will be forced to abandon the Stability Pact, that is, excessive austerity.

However, and although the EU was supposed to take care of its defense from the moment of its establishment, which it did not do, like many others, its decision seems quite problematic at the present juncture. And this, because the declaration of war, I would say, is probably ruled out, based on the obviously contrary intentions of the superpower. And, also, because from statements by European officials, the danger they think they see comes from Russia's supposedly expansionist tendencies. The allocation of this huge amount of money by the EU for defense certainly marginalizes it even more, without Russian expansionism being at its door. Unless, and if the orders for defense are made, mainly, within the EU, in which case they will somewhat revive its economy.

II. The new international order 

The changes in the international economic system will be significant, but more or less predictable, since the shift from globalization to protectionism follows a cycle of around 50 years and their general characteristics are known.

On the contrary, Trump's new international order is predicted to contain stormy changes. And although these have not yet been fully formed, so that the present lecture can be considered premature, I will try to draw some general outline of it. And then, I hope to be invited by the IHA later, for a more specific analysis.

I should point out, however, that Trump is not the first US president to appear as a nationalist and indifferent to the world outside America. In keeping with the proportions, he is reviving President Nixon (1969-1974), who, without anyone's approval, abolished the Bretton Woods international monetary system, which after the end of World War II linked the world's currencies to the dollar and gold, and imposed a 10% tariff on all imports passing through customs.

As an introduction to the stormy changes, I consider the rapprochement and understanding between Trump and Putin regarding the end of the war in Ukraine. Which logically includes the shadow of China in the background. Given that Russia and China belong to the countries that are turning against the West, and yet the two great powers have sworn eternal friendship and alliance.

Confrontation of two worlds

The war in Ukraine made clear the violent confrontation between two worlds. That of the West, which is based on liberal democracy, and that which unfolds within the capitalist regime, based on respect for individual rights, freedom of expression, and the free movement of goods, services, and ideas (globalization).

This, moreover, Western civilization, defends basic values life, such as religion, history, patriotism, family. Against him civilization is being built by a set of countries that, according to the West, live under the reprehensible regime of illiberal democracy, and which must be destroyed by any means, even if it requires the use of weapons.

The West has been trying by every means possible to impose this civilization on the entire globe, while for years it seems convinced that only it ensures the happiness and destiny of humanity.

For Europe and the US under Biden, the battle in Ukraine was about sovereignty and the defense of democracy against autocracy. Trump, however, is not at all interested in these arguments. Although he likes to present himself as a “peacemaker”, he is also a “realist” who recognizes that might is right. And, therefore, in the economic field, he demands that America pay, from Ukraine, in scarce Ukrainian lands, for the costs of the war.

The decline of the West

The West, unfortunately, has been showing progressive signs of decline in recent years, starting with demographic decline and the aging of its population, with an emphasis on the relevant developments in Europe, and progressing to deindustrialization, unprecedented inequalities in distribution, the impoverishment and shrinking of the middle class, the substantial stagnation of the purchasing value of wages, the return of inflation, and the awareness of the West's dependence, not only on essential energy sources, but also on basic nutritional and new technology products.

The decline of the West, beyond its demographic and economic manifestations, has gradually eroded the appeal of Western values ​​in the rest of the world, bringing serious upheavals to the international chessboard. This is because both the values ​​that the West, in theory, serves, and democracy, which, among other things, served as a cover for wars against non-democratic countries in order to acquire it, have suffered a very serious rupture.

Therefore, and also because civilizations do not survive for more than 200 years (Oswald Spengler), according to predictions, in 2050 America will be second in the global hierarchy, while China will have occupied the first place. Among European economies in the year 2050, Germany will occupy the 5th place.^η in order of importance (from third in 2022), the UK will have fallen to 7th^η position, from 5^η in which it was in 2022, and France in 9^ηby 7^η in which it was in 2022.

Even more dramatic upheavals are announced for the year 2075. First, America's position becomes more unfavorable since it will have lost the second place in terms of GDP, compared to India, which will have taken it over.

Trump seeks to keep the US on the global stage, together with forces that have been opposed until now, such as perhaps the BRICS, a well-known movement that began 16 years ago and is already recognized as an "integrated South."

In recent years, the BRICS have experienced rapid growth and have reached a population equal to that of the G7 (the 7 most powerful countries in the world), and an income that exceeded that of the G7. The BRICS, despite their organizational weaknesses, were evolving into a second pole, facing the West. A group of countries, the BRICS, led by Russia and China, who harbored unquenchable hatred against the West, for its contemptuous behavior towards them. And who began to gnaw at the dollar, preparing another, their own currency.

Trump, unlike Biden and Janet Yellen, assessed the BRICS initiative to create a currency competing with the $ as a significant threat, which should definitely disappear. Trump, therefore, demands guarantees that the BRICS will not proceed with a parallel currency to the dollar. For the time being, however, Trump's policy towards them has not been clarified, while they themselves continue as before Trump.

What shape does US foreign policy take?

Let's see now, what is foreseen as a continuation in the international political firmament of the world?

At this point, we should try to decipher the meaning of Trump's truly disturbing statement. That is, the old rules are being thrown out the window. Which initially translates to the fact that the world's problems do not concern America and that the imposition of tariffs isolates it from the rest of the world.

While Vice President Vance added that European governments are authoritarian because they refuse to cooperate with governments they characterize as far-right. And if Europe continues to behave like this, it will cease to be an ally of the United States.

Let me clarify, at this point, that Trump and Vance, with two phrases, are demolishing the ideological foundation on which the West was built after the end of World War II. Which, possibly, means two things:

*First, that there is now no obstacle for the US to be friends and allies with countries that do not embrace liberal democracy. That is, who agree with Xi Jinping, who claims that "it doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice." And who, of course, also approve of Putin, whom until yesterday the West was promoting and denigrating as a bloodthirsty dictator, against whom the West was supposedly obliged to take measures. And, of course, how can one not say it? Trump was absolutely right, calling Zelensky a dictator. While the West, for 3 years, was fondling him as a democrat.

*But, and secondly, America's statement that it is against the EU is very important, because it remains in the old ideology, that of liberal democracy. Which, obviously, Trump already rejects. Obviously, with the excuse that has recently been circulating, and which unfortunately is not far from reality, namely that its widespread use had many hypocritical angles. And, indeed, what kind of degree of democracy can one talk about, when based on the latest research, only 8% of the world's inhabitants have a real democracy, while the remaining 92% have a hybrid. Which fits everything, and above all the use of double standards, for the same cases. Now, with Trump, comes the complete refutation of the well-known statement of Francis Fukuyama. Who, with the end of the Cold War, assured the world of the end of history. That is, the definitive dominance of liberal democracy in the world.

I should note that Trump also expressed dissatisfaction with allies in Asia, such as Japan and South Korea, choosing forms of isolation.

Regarding free trade, that is, globalization, according to Trump, it is the system that, for decades, gave free rein to all countries on the planet to prey on America's interests and rights. A view that certainly requires a lot of discussion.

The world, therefore, with the new planetary ruler, is moving forward without rules. What could this observation mean?

It means, in general, that in international relations, where international law was in force, its validity is no longer recognized, because it was not applied correctly in all cases, it was widely accused even before Trump, as hypocritical, and therefore it must be changed. Specifically, the BRICS argue that international organizations operated in favor of the West. The hitherto unipolar system of the West is being radically changed, which with the BRICS could evolve into a bipolar or multipolar one.

What will replace the previously existing international system? What will the new international order be like?

As, in this field, nothing has yet been formalized, the hypotheses, based on some indications, are all open.

At this moment, as everything shows, the world is returning to the 19th century system of Europe's nation-states, where power was the main regulating factor, and there were no international organizations. A finding that necessarily makes the world more insecure.

But what could America be seeking by abolishing the current international order? I think it is obvious that it is seeking to halt or slow down its own decline, which inevitably leads to a decline in its international power. It is clearly directed against its successors to global primacy. China, India, etc.

On the contrary, it is not at all interested in the decline of Europe. It seeks exclusively its own salvation. It will also probably stop the Third World aid programs, which had already been greatly degraded.

The means by which America will pursue its goals

In order to succeed, America, in maintaining its position at the top of the world, is necessarily turning against its future competitors, and mainly, of course, against China, but also India. Simply put, America's effort, in the coming years, will be to achieve growth rates higher than its competitors. And not, in terms of general development, but with a focus on new technologies, in all areas of course. In Artificial Intelligence, where China already seems to excel, in the exploitation of space, in smart weapons of war, in ensuring water sufficiency, in the climate, etc.

In this effort, which is expressed as "America First Again", she hopes to be helped by:

*First of all, peace, which it truly desires, as demonstrated by its decision to significantly reduce its defense spending. It needs peace to advance its plans. And here comes Trump's initiative in a video from Davos 2025, to call on Russia and China to limit their nuclear arsenals.

*Second, with some form of alliance, essentially a wolfish alliance with Russia, which will include China, but perhaps also Iran, for which it shows interest, but also any other country that it imagines to be threatening its primacy and that would be satisfied if it were accepted by the West. But, of course, knowing what is happening, and what America is seeking, these countries will not trust it. They will have understood that the friendship of the US is to lull them to sleep.

The EU, as we have already said, is not of interest to America, because it generally believes that it is unable to advance its plans or considers it finished.

A legitimate question is whether the EU will decide to take measures against America, which it has, to some extent, and which, in the context of a trade war, would create problems for America. The answer is uncertain. I would say, without certainty, that the EU will not attempt it, because it has many other thorns to take care of. But, it is not ruled out.

*Third, America, of course, hopes that the abolition of international rules, of the United Nations, will ensure that it will essentially be able to do, with its power, whatever it thinks is in its best interest. To acquire Greenland, to associate itself in some way with Canada, the Panama Canal and so on. China is obviously encouraged, in this way, to annex Taiwan. Israel to acquire part of Gaza. Russia to acquire territories of Ukraine and so on. Let me not continue with more frightening scenarios, especially for Greece. Theoretically, all national borders are under threat. Mainly the small and weak countries, which include Greece. Conquest returns, as long as the UN institution retreats. America probably envisions becoming great again, through annexations. However, competitors have the same right, at least theoretically, so the outcome cannot be certain in advance.

*Fourth, Trump is abandoning the form of global leadership that America has had since 1945, but also does not want it to pass into other hands. The world is being left without leadership and without stability control, directed on a case-by-case basis by force. Trump is thus essentially abolishing everything that constituted the West, putting NOTHING in its place. Or the Law of the Jungle. The influence of billionaire Elon Musk on Trump's decision for isolationism seems to be particularly strong.

CONCLUSIONS

We have also reached conclusions, the extraction of which is even more difficult than the analysis of the main body, as the dark sides of the whole issue outweigh the bright ones.

*As a first conclusion, then, let me repeat the incredible fact that in the new international order there will be, in essence, no international law and no international organizations. Not that they will have been officially abolished, but they will have no scope.

It seems scary. However, let me remind you that the degree of effectiveness of international law has clearly declined in recent years. And it was increasingly accepted that its operation favors the powerful and, moreover, that it appears with double standards. Let me mention, in this regard, that international law was not shaken by the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, more than 50 years ago, while on the contrary it shed fiery tears for the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Let me proceed with the complete inaction of international law, to the daily threats of the Turks against us, as contained in the myth of the Blue Homeland. Let me not forget the orgy of certain obligations imposed on Greece by the Memoranda, from which international law was conspicuously absent, such as, among other things, the obligation not to offset debts. Let me also add the demand of Mrs. von der Leyen, who undauntedly demands payment of debts from Ukraine, when her country owes trillions to Greece, which it has refused to pay for 53 years.

So that we don't go to other lengths and widths, such as the war in Iraq, the Israel-Hamas war, etc., etc.

Nevertheless, we will certainly miss international law, even as a utopia, that we could perhaps, under certain conditions, find our own justice. The certainty that we will have to cope on our own will certainly be stressful.

Oh, and let's not forget a positive result, related to the abolition of the West. That is, Greece will no longer be stressed, every time an issue is raised, in order to prove that it "belongs to the West."

*The second conclusion appears in the form of a question, which at present cannot be answered clearly. That is, will the new international order imposed by Trump be permanent, or will it change, and when and in what form? Everything is possible, but none of this can be predicted with any reasonable degree of probability. Even World War III cannot be ruled out.

*The third conclusion, also in the form of a question, is whether there are possibilities on the horizon for an effective response that could overthrow Trump's new order. That is, by creating conditions that would create serious obstacles to Trump's plans, as they are included in the new international order.

At the moment, the most likely reaction to Trump's plans is the BRICS. And of its 10 members, China and Russia. The only case that could spoil Trump's plans, and the one that panics him, is the creation of a parallel currency, which would limit the reach of the $ and highlight the specter of the enormous American debt. Trump threatened the BRICS with imposing 100% tariffs on their products if they dare to continue efforts to create their own currency.

However, although sanctions, as has been proven once again in the case of the war in Ukraine, can also work the other way around, the relevant decision will be made by China and Russia. That is, if it is more beneficial for them to be recognized and to remain on Trump's side (although it is certain that they will not trust his seemingly good intentions) or if, on the contrary, they end up continuing the effort to deepen the BRICS organization, to increase their membership and to continue their policy. For the time being, I cannot answer.

And finally, the big question is whether the elements of the new international order promoted by Trump, if of course their implementation is not hindered by effective reactions, will have the desired result. Which is: "America great again". And which is analyzed in that America will remain first at the top of the world, having outsmarted its traditional allies, but having prevented China from displacing it. I will risk a positive answer here. America's victory, however, will simply be a 3-5 year delay for China to take over the succession at the top of the world. Because, the river is not turning back, and the West is already in deep decline, even if it has thrown Europe off its back, which is in an even more advanced stage of decline.

https://professors-phds.com/2025/03/28/74502/