The National Interest What Is Trump’s “New Realism” in Foreign Policy? July 4, 2025 By: Lyle J. Goldstein

The National Interest 

What Is Trump’s “New Realism” in Foreign Policy?

July 4, 2025

By: Lyle J. Goldstein

Trump’s new foreign policy leans toward recognizing spheres of influence, departing from past interventionism and potentially avoiding future great power conflicts, especially with China, if handled with restraint and clarity.

It’s relatively straightforward that the second Trump administration is pursuing some form of foreign policy realism, but what particular sect remains a hotly debated topic. Signs are tentatively pointing toward a “spheres of influence-type” brand of realpolitik, and that could be positive for global peace and stability.

One close observer of Trumpian politics recently characterized this new approach as simply prolific “deal-making,” which has placed a businessman’s imprimatur on the “new realism.” As foreign policy experts are well aware, “realism” encompasses a rich tradition of thinking on diplomacy and war that spans millennia, dating back to the Greek historian Thucydides, a thinker whose ideas continue to inform the contemporary Washington dilemma regarding China policy.

What Is Realism?

The myriad traditions under the umbrella of realist thought on global politics share a singular focus on power as the primary arbiter in world affairs. For those wondering about the future of the vitally important US-China relationship, a dyad increasingly taking on the appearance of a “new Cold War,” it will be imperative to understand the Trump administration’s approach to realism.

A valid framework for assessing the internal realist debates within the Trump administration concerns whether the current realism will embrace “power balancing” or instead lean in the alternative direction of embracing “spheres of influence.” 

The former “power balancing” idea of countering China on all fronts seems to have been the animating idea of Trump’s first administration. And these concepts concerning accelerating “Great Power Competition” were wholeheartedly embraced under the Biden administration as well, with somewhat uncertain and even dangerous results.

Now, with wars in both Eastern Europe and the Middle East showing no signs of subsiding, Trump’s second administration appears to be exploring a somewhat novel approach that embraces this sphere of influence perspective. 

Marco Rubio’s quite surprising embrace of multipolarity in one of his first interviews gave a powerful hint of this new approach. In general, his appointment implied a priority for Latin America, which is quite consistent with a spheres-of-influence outlook, and this has come to fruition in many respects.

What Is the Trump Administration’s Plan for South American Diplomacy?

Immigration, notably securing the border, has been put at the top of the national security agenda, as demonstrated by the initial report from the National Intelligence Council regarding threats to the United States. Regarding sanctions against Venezuela and the relatively recent wave of immigration from that country into the US, it still seems that Washington’s policy may be plagued by apparent contradictions, not least that heavier sanctions might once again result in a new tide of desperate immigrants.

Trump’s transactional approach with El Salvador raises more than a few troubling questions. Still, it must be admitted that President Nayib Bukele has dramatically improved security in what was once the world’s murder capital. In nearby Panama, Trump’s “spheres of influence” policy has been on its starkest display with his stern approach to Panama, a policy that touches directly on US-China relations.

Regarding the sensitive Canal Zone in Panama, Washington’s muscular diplomacy since early 2025 toward the Central American country has resulted in numerous Panamanian concessions, including a willingness to withdraw from China’s Belt and Road Initiative. 

Among the many nettlesome issues in US-China relations, China’s presence in Panama is not a major one, but the new US policy did rankle Beijing. Hopefully, there can be a logical compromise on fees paid by US ships (including naval vessels). It should be recognized that the Panama Canal has always constituted a vital national security interest of the US, so Washington’s obsessive focus is somewhat reasonable.

Looking outside the Western Hemisphere, one can easily see how a sphere of influence approach to US grand strategy would mark a significant departure from previous policies, while also opening the door to more restraint-oriented strategic choices.