The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published a piece last Friday, stating: ‘The “authoritarian” Trump narrative was wrong again.’
President Donald Trump backed down from his maximalist demand to own Greenland after financial markets saw their biggest losses since October 2025, not to mention objections raised by European allies and U.S. lawmakers.
This narrative appears to be a déjà-vu from last May when he took China head-on by imposing massive tariffs. Instead of caving in, President Xi Jinping not only responded with tariffs of his own but also withheld vital rare-earth minerals necessary for advanced military weapons, electric vehicles, smartphones, etc. Trump then reportedly lowered his 145 per cent tariffs down to 30 per cent on Chinese imports, and China followed by dropping its 125 per cent tariffs down to 10 per cent on U.S. imports.
The WSJ editorial board went on to say:
‘The story here isn’t TACO—that Trump always chickens out, in the Wall Street gibe. It’s that Mr. Trump isn’t all-powerful. As a democratic leader in a constitutional republic, he must cope with checks and balances.’
This is true, but all the melodrama Trump raised with Greenland is part of his business-type strategy, which entails belligerent rhetoric and dockside bullying. He then normally tones down his aggression in order to cut a deal.
If we take a look at how he has been dealing with the Arab Middle East countries, the president is not driven by the idealism of nation-building or social engineering like his predecessors. Instead, he is compelled by utilitarianism and a preference for power politics. Trump divides the world into winners and losers and zealously aligns himself with the former.
In a Foreign Affairs article, Ray Takeyh says that President Trump ‘practices politics without judgment’.
‘Israel is strong, so he lets it do as it wishes,’ Takeyh continues. ‘The Arab Gulf sheikhdoms have oil and make deals, so he engages with them. But the Palestinians are the region’s losers, and thus not worth much concern.’
‘Trump divides the world into winners and losers’
Trump’s foreign policy, which I characterize as transactionalism, is not one that addresses the violation of human rights in other parts of the world, nor is it one that seeks to maintain a balance of power with other nation-states. Instead, it is one in which he seeks to employ his own personal power, convinced that his charisma will secure a deal. Those whom he believes do not fit into his agenda, he castigates, as with his recent spat with Canada—Trump vowed to raise tariffs by 100 per cent solely because the Canadians made a ‘door-off’ deal with China that would expand trade and mutual investment between the two nations, while focusing on areas such as agriculture, agri-food, energy, and finance.
Indeed, as White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said: ‘You can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else. We live in a world…that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power.’
Reverting to Greenland, according to his post on social media, the president said that he ‘had formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region’ as a result of a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that lasted less than an hour.
While few specifics have emerged about the ‘framework’, annexing Greenland is not part of the would-be pact.
Apparently, as reported by the New York Times, the deal would increase NATO’s presence in the Arctic, give America a sovereign claim to pockets of Greenland’s territory and block potentially hostile adversaries, like China and Russia, from mining the island’s minerals—this would upgrade the 1951 agreement with Denmark that gives the US military wide access to Greenland for operations including the construction and operation of military bases.
The truth of the matter is, Greenland does not have the rich abundance of rare earth minerals as Trump claimed. Not to mention, whatever little it has is not easily accessible. One wonders then why he would alienate his allies and simultaneously upend the current world order?
Henri-Paul Normandin, a former Canadian diplomat, says Trump must have realized Europe’s resolve in opposing his ambitions for Greenland and was left looking for a way to claim some sort of victory.
‘Essentially, he is backing off to some extent because Europe is reacting so strongly,’ Normandin told CBC News Network. This is not necessarily false, but at the same time, it is not altogether true. Europe truly has no leverage since it has nothing going for itself, with the exception of keeping the war in Ukraine alive, and this is something not to brag about. At the same time, this is where Trump’s transactional policy has, once more, proven to be unsuccessful. Just like with China, Trump has more than a stout adversary in Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Russian autocrat is someone who cannot be pushed around.
Is Trump’s transactional foreign policy a chimera or a reality? Tactful as it may be, while it may have brought some sort of limited stability in certain areas, as well as increased his family’s wealth, it will definitely not ameliorate any tension in the hotspots of the world.
The views expressed by our guest authors are theirs and do not necessarily represent the views of Hungarian Conservative.
Related articles:
At a time when public debate is increasingly polarized and superficial, Hungarian Conservative remains committed to depth, intellectual honesty, and independent conservative thought.
Producing high-quality journalism requires resources. Your contribution helps us expand our coverage, reach new audiences, and keep our content accessible.
Please consider supporting our mission.
