Donald Trump’s return to the White House is poised to reshape US foreign policy, potentially ushering in sweeping changes amid ongoing global conflict and uncertainty, the BBC reports.

Throughout his campaign, Trump made broad policy promises, often lacking specific details, rooted in his principles of non-interventionism and trade protectionism – what he calls “America First.”

His victory could mark one of the most significant shifts in Washington’s foreign policy approach in recent years, particularly given the current global crises.

From his comments on the election campaign and his run in power from 2017 to 2021, the BBC has inferred some of his likely approaches towards different regions and issues.

Russia, Ukraine and NATO

During the campaign, Trump repeatedly said he could end the war between Russia and Ukraine “in one day.” When asked how, he suggested overseeing a deal, but declined to elaborate.

A May research paper by two former Trump national security chiefs said the United States should continue arms deliveries to Ukraine, but condition its support on kyiv’s entry into peace talks. peace with Russia.

To attract Russia, the West would promise to delay Ukraine’s much-desired entry into NATO. The former advisers said Ukraine should not abandon its hopes of recovering all of its territory from Russian occupation, but should negotiate based on current front lines.

Trump’s Democratic opponents, who accuse him of cozying up to Russian President Vladimir Putin, say his approach amounts to a capitulation for Ukraine and would endanger all of Europe.

He always said his priority was ending the war and stemming the drain on American resources.

It’s unclear to what extent the former advisers’ document represents Trump’s own thinking, but it is likely to give us an idea of ​​the type of advice he will receive.

His “America first” approach to ending the war also extends to the strategic question of the future of NATO, the “one for one and one for all” transatlantic military alliance created after the Second World War, originally as a bulwark against the Soviet Union.

NATO now has 32 countries and Trump has long been skeptical of the alliance, accusing Europe of taking advantage of the United States’ promise of protection.

Whether it would actually withdraw the United States from NATO, which would mark the most significant change in transatlantic defense relations in nearly a century, remains a matter of debate.

Some of its allies suggest its hard line is just a negotiating tactic to get members to respect the alliance’s defense spending guidelines.

But the reality is that NATO leaders will be seriously concerned about what its victory will mean for the future of the alliance and how its deterrent effect will be perceived by hostile leaders.

The Middle East

As with Ukraine, Trump promised to bring “peace” to the Middle East – implying he would end the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza and the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon – but did not specify how.

He has repeatedly said that, if he had been in power rather than Joe Biden, Hamas would not have attacked Israel because of its policy of “maximum pressure” on Iran, which funds the group.

Generally speaking, it is likely that Trump would attempt to return to the policies that saw his administration withdraw the United States from the Iran nuclear deal, implement tougher sanctions against Iran, and kill General Qasem Soleimani – Iran’s most powerful military commander.

At the White House, Trump adopted a strongly pro-Israel policy, designating Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv — a move that energized Trump’s evangelical Christian base, a key Republican voting group .

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Trump “the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House.”

But critics say his policies have had a destabilizing effect on the region.

Palestinians have boycotted the Trump administration over Washington’s abandonment of their claims to Jerusalem, the city that constitutes the historic center of Palestinian national and religious life.

They were further isolated when Trump negotiated the so-called “Abraham Accords,” which saw a historic agreement to normalize diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab and Muslim countries. They did this without Israel having to accept on its side a future independent Palestinian state – the so-called two-state solution – which was previously a condition of Arab countries for such a regional agreement.

Rather, affected countries were given access to advanced US weapons in exchange for recognition of Israel.

The Palestinians have found themselves at one of the most isolated moments in their history by the only power that can actually exert influence on both sides of the conflict – further eroding their ability, they say, to protect themselves on the ground.

Trump made several statements during the campaign saying he wanted the war in Gaza to end.

He has had a complex, sometimes dysfunctional, relationship with Netanyahu, but he certainly has the ability to pressure him.

He also maintains close relations with the leaders of major Arab countries that maintain contacts with Hamas.

It’s unclear how he would navigate his desire to show strong support for Israeli leaders while trying to end the war.

Trump’s allies have often touted his unpredictability as a diplomatic asset, but in a highly contested and volatile Middle East, amid a crisis already of historic proportions, it is far from clear how that would play out.

Trump will have to decide how — or whether — to advance the stalled diplomatic process launched by the Biden administration to secure a ceasefire in Gaza in exchange for the release of hostages held by Hamas.

China and trade

America’s approach to China constitutes the most strategically important area of ​​foreign policy – ​​and the one with the greatest implications for global security and trade.

While in office, Trump called China a “strategic competitor” and imposed tariffs on some Chinese imports to the United States. This triggered tariffs imposed by Beijing on US imports.

Efforts were made to defuse the trade conflict, but the Covid pandemic dashed that possibility, and relations deteriorated when the former president referred to Covid as the “Chinese virus.”

While the Biden administration claimed to be taking a more responsible approach to China policy, it actually maintained many of the Trump-era tariffs on imports.

Trade policy has become closely tied to American voters’ perceptions of protecting American manufacturing jobs – even though much of the long-term job decline in traditional American industries like steel has as much to do with the automation of factories and changes in production as well as global competition and changes in production. relocation.

Trump praised Chinese President Xi Jinping as both “brilliant” and “dangerous” and as a highly effective leader who controls 1.4 billion people with an “iron fist,” which is part of what opponents called Trump’s admiration for “dictators.”

The former president appears likely to move away from the Biden administration’s approach of building stronger security partnerships with other countries in the region in an effort to contain China.

The United States has maintained military assistance to Taiwan, an autonomous province that China considers a breakaway province that will ultimately be under Beijing’s control.

Trump said in October that if he returned to the White House, he would not need to use military force to prevent a Chinese blockade of Taiwan because President Xi knew he was “(expletive) crazy.” , and it would impose crippling tariffs on Chinese imports. if that happened.