By Yashvardhan Singh
Donald Trump’s entry into the world of international politics was marked not by seasoned diplomacy but by the traits of a businessman stepping into a chessboard far more complex than any boardroom.
Unlike his predecessors, who spent years cultivating alliances and learning the subtleties of negotiation, Trump carried with him a transactional mindset—where every deal had to end in visible “profit” for America, irrespective of its long-term diplomatic consequences.
The enforcement of reciprocal tariffs during his presidency stood as a glaring example of this approach. In theory, tariffs can indeed serve as a protective mechanism, shielding domestic producers from the volatility of foreign exchange and unpredictable global markets.
But Trump wielded tariffs less as a strategic safeguard and more as a blunt instrument of political showmanship, branding them as a tool to bolster his “Make America Great Again” narrative.
Instead of fostering mutual growth, his moves often created friction and mistrust among allies and trading partners.
India, a rapidly growing economy and a key player in the global South, became one of the nations that witnessed Trump’s undiplomatic maneuvering firsthand.
His insistence on recalibrating trade terms with India displayed little sensitivity to the nuances of cooperation.
He treated negotiations like corporate deals—pressuring, demanding concessions, and emphasizing America’s leverage—without realizing that countries like India value strategic autonomy and will not succumb to one-sided persuasion.
The situation became more glaring when the geopolitical triangle of India, Russia, and China started realigning its interests.
This was a reminder to Trump that the era of unchallenged U.S. hegemony had ended. Emerging economies and established powers alike were no longer willing to be dictated to by Washington’s terms.
Instead, they sought balance, cooperation, and a multipolar world order—something Trump seemed either unwilling or unable to grasp.
What compounded the problem was Trump’s tendency to treat international leaders as though they were rivals in a corporate takeover battle.
His exchanges with China’s Xi Jinping, his unpredictability with NATO allies, and his often dismissive stance towards European leaders only reinforced the image of a president who lacked the finesse of diplomacy.
Even with leaders from democracies like India, his tone leaned toward transactional bargains rather than cultivating long-term partnerships.
The truth remains that the art of international diplomacy cannot be measured in immediate wins or losses, as in business.
It requires patience, trust-building, and a recognition that other nations—especially large, fast-growing ones like India—have their own ambitions, values, and non-negotiables.
Trump’s inability to adapt from his boardroom instincts to the subtleties of global politics left the U.S. vulnerable to losing goodwill in regions where it once enjoyed near-total influence.
Gone are the days when America could dictate terms unilaterally. The new world order demands collaboration, not coercion.
Trump’s undiplomatic style may have resonated with his domestic audience, but on the global stage, it highlighted the limitations of applying business yardsticks to the delicate and layered sphere of international relations.
\#DonaldTrump #Diplomacy #InternationalRelations #GlobalPolitics #IndiaUSRelations #TradeWars #Tariffs #Geopolitics #USForeignPolicy #WorldOrder
( Yashvardhan Singh is pursuing post-graduation in Political Science from the University of Allahabad)
