Power, Money, Territory: How Trump Shook the World in 50 Days

Introduction

In a remarkably brief span of 50 days, President Donald Trump has dramatically reshaped America’s global position, upending longstanding alliances, economic relationships, and territorial understandings.

Trump's administration has executed more fundamental changes to the international order than many of his predecessors accomplished in years.

The actions taken since his inauguration have sent shockwaves through global capitals, reoriented America’s foreign policy priorities, and begun dismantling institutional frameworks that have defined the post-World War II era.

Dismantling the International Order

The international, national system America meticulously built over eight decades has proven surprisingly fragile in the face of Trump’s determined assault. Trump has effectively revolutionized how America exercises power globally without announcing a formal strategic reorientation. In less than two months, Trump has achieved what many thought was impossible: significantly undermining the foundations of the international framework established by the United States since its victory in World War II. This transformation has occurred without an articulated vision for what might replace the existing order.

As R. Nicholas Burns, former US ambassador to China under President Biden observed: “When you’re voting alongside North Korea and Iran against NATO allies, failing to confront Russian aggression, and making threats against the territory of your allies, something has fundamentally shifted.

We may have breached the trust of our allies in a way that could be irreparable”.

Trump’s administration has executed a series of dramatic foreign policy shifts, including altering the US position on the Ukraine conflict, siding with Russia in a UN vote labeling Moscow as the aggressor, and severing Ukraine’s access to commercial satellite intelligence.

These actions represent a stark departure from traditional American foreign policy, which for decades prioritized supporting democracies against authoritarian aggression.

The Ukraine Pivot

Perhaps no foreign policy shift better exemplifies Trump’s transformative approach than his dramatic reversal on Ukraine. For three years, both Democrats and most Republicans viewed the war through the lens of traditional American policy—defending a democracy unlawfully invaded by a more significant power.

Trump, however, has labeled Ukrainian President Zelensky a “dictator” while refraining from applying the same term to Putin.

Trump has granted Putin two primary demands—refusing to support Ukraine’s NATO membership and indicating Ukraine must relinquish territory—while suggesting that if Ukraine wants security guarantees, it should consult with European neighbors, not the United States.

John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, bluntly summarized this shift: “Trump now aligns with the invader.”

Most recently, Trump announced plans to speak directly with Russian President Putin about ending the Ukraine war, with territorial concessions by Kyiv and control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant expected to feature prominently in these talks. “We’ll be talking about land.

We’ll be talking about power plants…We’re already discussing that, dividing up certain assets,” Trump stated.

Economic Warfare: Tariffs and Fiscal Policy

Trump’s economic policies have equally rattled global markets and longstanding trade relationships. His tariff strategy represents an economic and diplomatic weapon aimed at allies and competitors alike.

The administration has established a baseline tariff minimum of 10% on all imports to the US, with per-country rates varying considerably. Imports from China already face a 10% tariff, while threatened 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico remain temporarily on hold.

These measures are part of what some economists have labeled a “trade war” that could significantly impact the global economy.

Trump justifies these aggressive economic measures by arguing that traditional allies have exploited American generosity.

“The United States can’t subsidize a country for $200 billion annually. We don’t need their cars. We don’t need their energy. We don’t need their lumber. We don’t need anything that they give. We do it because we want to be helpful. But it comes a point when you can’t do that,” he stated regarding Canada.

Domestically, Trump has extended his 2017 tax cuts and is considering further reductions. The Congressional Budget Office estimates these tax cuts could increase the federal deficit by up to $4.5 trillion over ten years.

This combination of reduced taxation and increased tariffs represents a fundamental reshaping of America’s fiscal approach.

Dismantling Aid and Development

Trump’s economic revolution extends to America’s global development apparatus. Within weeks, his administration began dismantling the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), established by President Kennedy as a cornerstone of American soft power.

This effort has cut approximately 83% of US aid contracts, which has had devastating effects on developing countries.

On his inauguration day, Trump issued executive orders initiating the US withdrawal from the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement, halting associated funding immediately.

These decisions are already having profound impacts on global health initiatives, particularly in countries like Kenya, where US-funded HIV treatment programs face uncertain futures.

Territorial Ambitions and Threats

Perhaps most alarming to traditional allies is Trump’s unprecedented territorial expansion and control rhetoric. He has repeatedly threatened to expand American territory by incorporating sovereign countries as new “states” in the union.

Trump has persistently discussed making Canada the 51st state, dismissively referring to former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “Governor Trudeau.”

He describes the US-Canada border as “an artificial line right through it between Canada and the U.S., just a straight artificial line. Somebody did it a long time ago, many, many decades ago, and it makes no sense”.

These territorial ambitions extend beyond North America. Trump has expressed interest in controlling Greenland for its mineral wealth and strategic position near Arctic waters used by Russia and China.

He has also made claims regarding control of the Panama Canal and even suggested US management of Gaza.

At a January press conference before his inauguration, when asked if he would rule out using military or economic pressure to achieve his objectives in Greenland or Canada, Trump said, “I’m not going to commit to that. You might have to do something”.

This represents an extraordinary threat against NATO allies, severely undermining trust in American leadership.

Reshaping Government and Media Control

Trump’s transformation of American governance has extended to dismantling key institutions responsible for projecting American influence abroad.

Most recently, he signed an executive order to dismantle Voice of America (VOA), the government-funded international news outlet.

A senior White House official justified this action by claiming, “Voice of America has been out of step with America for years. It serves as the Voice for Radical America and has pushed divisive propaganda for years now”.

However, VOA’s director, Michael Abramowitz, warned that shuttering the agency would be a “self-inflicted blow” to national security, as it helps combat Chinese, Russian, and Iranian disinformation.

“If America pulls off the playing field and cedes it to our adversaries, then they’re going to be telling the narratives that people around the world are going to be hearing, and that can’t be good for America,” Abramowitz cautioned.

International Response and Realignment

Trump’s revolutionary first 50 days have prompted a fundamental reassessment of America’s reliability among traditional allies.

European nations, in particular, are reconsidering their security arrangements. French officials are discussing extending their nuclear umbrella over Europe, and Poland is contemplating developing its own nuclear capabilities.

Friedrich Merz, a potential future chancellor of Germany and longtime advocate for the trans-Atlantic alliance, made the extraordinary statement that his “absolute priority” would be to “achieve independence from the U.S.A.”

He admitted he never expected to take this position but concluded that the new administration was “largely indifferent to the fate of Europe.”

These reactions suggest Trump’s actions may be accelerating a fundamental realignment of the global order, potentially creating a multipolar system where regional powers establish their spheres of influence.

Former MI6 head Sir Alex likened the emerging system to the Yalta Conference, where Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin decided the fates of smaller nations.

Public Opinion and Domestic Support

Despite international concerns, Trump has maintained relatively strong domestic approval for his early actions. According to polling data, 52% of voters approved of Trump during the first 50 days of his second term.

Border security and immigration control remain cornerstones of his support, with 40% of voters believing border conditions have improved compared to just 16% who thought the situation was favorable before he took office.

However, many voters express concern about his confrontational approach with Ukrainian President Zelensky, his firing of federal workers, and economic fears regarding tariffs on Canada and Mexico.

These divisions highlight the stark contrast between Trump’s domestic reception and international perception.

Conclusion

In just 50 days, Donald Trump has fundamentally altered America’s position in the world. The system the United States spent 80 years building appears increasingly fragile in the face of his determined effort to reshape global politics according to his “America First” vision.

Whether these changes represent a temporary disruption or a permanent realignment remains unclear.

What is certain, however, is that Trump’s first 50 days have initiated what appears to be a revolution in American foreign policy—one that prioritizes bilateral transactional relationships over multilateral institutions, economic leverage over diplomatic engagement, and territorial ambitions over respect for sovereignty.

The consequences of this dramatic shift will likely reverberate throughout the remainder of Trump’s term and potentially well beyond. As international systems adapt to this new American posture, the world order that has maintained relative stability since World War II faces its most serious challenge in generations.

The accurate measure of Trump’s impact will ultimately depend on whether these changes prove temporary disruptions or permanent alterations to the global system.