After years of relative calm after the fall of the Berlin Wall, President Donald J. Trump has called into question key assumptions of the post-World War II modus operandi and many of the institutions that the United States helped to build, contributing to shifts in global power balances and heightened geopolitical tensions caused by armed conflict. Today, geopolitics affects local realities everywhere on the planet and has become a factor that cannot be ignored when we analyze both US policy and policy evolution globally.
The discussion of “The Role of the United States in the Reconfiguration of the Global Political System,” during the U.S. Policy Outlook event in Mexico City, centered on the country’s decision to shift away from traditional multilateral approaches, free trade orthodoxy, and support for democracy, and toward a power-based, transactional form of international relations that combines industrial policy and protectionism. This 180 degree shift has repercussions for the future of the country, as well as its neighbors, allies and foes.
“America First” is a unilateral vision based on the United States’1 outsized economic and military power with a narrative deeply rooted in a strong conception of American exceptionalism. The Trump administration believes that the United States was taken advantage of by its allies in Europe in the aftermath of World War II, and that organizations like the now-defunct USAID provided assistance that, in the administration’s view, did not generate strategic returns. It seems the perceived value of soft power as a way to gain influence and exert leadership has diminished significantly.
Ironically, President Trump was elected on a domestic platform to make life more comfortable and affordable for the average American worker, yet since taking office in January 2025, he has been heavily focused on foreing policy. The war in Iran and rising energy and food prices will no doubt further weaken public support for the President and his multiple foreign policy distractions.
This year began with a series of disruptive developments, and there has been little relief since: in January, the political crisis in Venezuela intensified; in late February the US and Israel launched military operations in Iran and Lebanon, a conflict that remains unresolved; in March the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that the contiguous United States had experienced the hottest month on record; and in April, the global economy faced renewed energy shocks with oil prices rising above $110 dollars per barrel, while the IMF lowered its global growth outlook, underlining mounting inflation pressures. The oulook remains highly uncertain.
What can we expect from US foreign policy in the short to medium term? More of the same. Competition with China is likely to remain a bipartisan priority in the United States, and most strategies will seek to limit other countries from forging alliances with China. Economic security is a major priority, and that translates into reducing supply chain vulnerabilities and strengthening ties with countries closer to home.
As outlined by the White House in the corollary to the Monroe Doctrine in December 2025, the Trump administration sees the Americas writ large -from Canada to Argentina- as firmly under the purview of the United States, a not-so-veiled message to China and to countries that might may seek closer ties with the Asian giant.
Are we heading toward a new version of a bipolar world, with spheres of influence divided between the U.S. and China, or might a multipolar world emerge under a vision similar to that expressed by Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada? It is still too early to tell, but middle powers around the world are closely observing U.S. stridency and moving quickly to diversify their partnerships. Creative alliances do not need to focus solely on trade. Cooperation in areas such as the energy transition, the environment, education, investment, and immigration should also be considered areas for strategic collaboration.
It is impossible to know what the future holds at this turbulent moment, but the need to think creatively and to look beyond what we once understood as the rules of the game may help countries to protect themselves against excessive market concentration. For Mexico, the relationship with the U.S. will remain a priority, but does that mean it should not actively seek diversification as a medium- to long-term priority? It would seem that remaining passive in the face of these global shifts is not the best strategy if Mexico hopes to seize the opportunities emerging from today’s geopolitical and economic reconfiguration.
1. Senior Fellow for the U.S. and North America, COMEXI
