By: Luqman Ahmad Khan
The agora of 2025 remains a fraught space, with the policies of President Donald Trump and the ideological battles of his administration once again casting a long shadow over modern diplomacy. Drawing on a mix of treaties, sanctions, and diplomatic ties, national interests, strategic alliances, and the cracks that have already appeared between the USA and its allies, there is a patchwork of diplomatic relationships that mirrors the actions of the Trump administration and the reactions to those actions from a variety of global players. From trade wars to immigration policies, the Trump legacy is part of the very fabric of contemporary international relations, with long shadows added to an already tangled world.
A potent ideology of economic nationalism was the beating heart of the Trump era. The trade disputes initiated by Trump’s administration especially with economic heavyweights like China were built on tariffs that aimed to shield American manufacturing and jobs. We were in 2025 and the overreaching actions of these people had the world trembling. Data trains on information till October 2023.
Particularly hit has been the Asia-Pacific region. Countries such as India and Vietnam, long sidelined in international trade conversations, have emerged as viable substitutes to China for Western economies trying to diversify supply chains. With the American withdrawal from the rules of global trade, that vacuum has been filled, as peer nations have increasingly collaborated with each other to construct market networks in their own image, but one that is often less favorable to American interests.
Trump’s foreign policy was marked by a strong preference for bilateral deals and a general distrust of multilateral organizations. This tendency unintentionally emboldened authoritarian regimes to take a more assertive approach. With Trump continuously promoting the idea of “America First,” countries like Russia and Turkey capitalized on the moment, working to increase their influence in areas that had traditionally been aligned with the United States.
In 2025, we’re seeing a clear comeback of authoritarianism in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Russia is pushing its agenda in Ukraine, ignoring international standards and putting even more pressure on NATO’s solidarity. At the same time, Turkey, led by President Erdogan, is taking advantage of what seems like a retreat of American power to expand its influence across the Mediterranean and into the Caucasus. This breakdown in a united Western front has given these governments a boost, highlighting the impact of a less involved United States in world affairs.
One of the most controversial aspects of Trump’s presidency was his rejection of climate change and the decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement. By 2025, the consequences of this approach are being felt more than ever as nations face the growing pressure of climate-related disasters. We’ve seen extreme weather events becoming more common and more intense, resulting in humanitarian crises that spill over borders. Now more than ever, international cooperation is crucial, but the divisions that marked the Trump era have left countries struggling to coordinate their responses.
Even though the U.S. plans to rejoin the Paris Agreement by 2025, it hasn’t automatically regained its leadership position in climate talks. The shadow of previous policies still hangs over us, raising questions about America’s dedication and reliability. Countries that are still developing, which often suffer the most from the effects of climate change, are speaking out more and urging the West to provide real support and reparations. The discussions about climate change at the geopolitical level show a movement towards shared responsibility, but they’re still filled with tensions tied to past actions and unmet promises.
Trump’s rhetoric often shook up long-standing alliances, taking a realist stance that raised questions about the value of NATO and partnerships in Asia. As we move into 2025, the fallout from this approach is clear in the changing alliances and escalating regional tensions. In Asia, the Quad made up of the U.S., India, Japan, and Australia has become a stronger counter to Chinese influence, but its effectiveness is still limited by the different national interests at play.
Over in Europe, countries are facing their own hurdles in creating a unified response to security threats, particularly with the rise of Russian aggression. The EU’s unity is being tested as member states deal with various authoritarian trends, migration challenges, and the struggle for economic recovery after the pandemic. Trump’s doubts about NATO have left some European nations uncertain about the level of American support, leading them to think about adopting a more independent defense strategy.
One of the most controversial aspects of Trump’s presidency was his refusal to acknowledge climate change and withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. In 2025, the consequences of this position are keenly felt as nations struggle with the accelerating urgency of climate disasters. Extreme weather and humanitarian crises have not only become more severe but also more widespread, crossing national borders. For the international cooperation that is essential, fragmentation during the Trump years left world leaders at odds in their responses.
The U.S. rejoining the Paris Agreement by 2025 has not magically restored its leadership role in climate negotiations. The ghost of solo acts past continues to haunt the present, calling into question American intention and reliability. Countries in the developing world, which are often those most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, are becoming more outspoken in their demands of the West for concrete aid and reparations. The conversations around climate change in a geopolitical context reflect a growing recognition of the need for shared responsibility, however, they remain fraught with tensions rooted in behavior from yesterday and promises broken.
Trump’s rhetoric ran to upending long-term alliances and embraced a realist view of the world that sometimes dismissed the value of NATO or partnerships with countries in Asia. Now in 2025 the consequences of that stance are apparent in the rearranging of the deck chairs and rising regional tensions. In Asia, too, the Quad—the United States, India, Japan and Australia—has crystallized as a counterweight to the influence of China, though its effectiveness is constrained by differences in what those countries want.
In Europe, you have to mediate between the interests of all these countries, make sure they coalesce and take a unified security response against Russia’s increasingly aggressive moves. The unity of the EU is strained as member states navigate disparate authoritarian trends, migration problems, and economic recovery from the pandemic. And has there been any doubt this has left over American commitment to NATO and its European members? It has European nations considering a more independent defense capacity.
The nature of these developments has also altered, with most developments revolutionized by advances in technology, especially in cybersecurity and information warfare. We now have a big part of Trump’s presidency defined by allegations surrounding foreign interference in elections, setting the stage for new conversations about privacy, disinformation, and national security. The ongoing battle for control of technology as of 2025 has pitted governments against each other based on perceived models of data privacy and cybersecurity protocols.
The tech battle between the U.S. and China has heated up, with both superpowers trying to win new frontiers such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing. The implications go beyond competition; they are reordering alliances and creating new fault lines. Countries are under rising pressure to pick sides, adding to a fragmentation of the global digital landscape that recalls divisions during the Cold War.
Looking back at 2025’s global field, the dark shadow of Trump’s policies continues to cast its pall. The globel has gone through massive upheavals that threaten the status quo and have ushered in a period of uncertainty. Nationalism, authoritarianism, the climate agenda, new alignments, and technology to govern technology highlights a reality that all regions must navigate with agility.
Trump’s legacy is, at the very least, a warning to all future GOP candidates. This history of isolationism and economic nationalism, the legacies of which are felt in our policies even today, serves as a cautionary tale against narrowly viewed policies that fall against the backdrop of local rhetoric but lack a deep, fundamental understanding of and cooperation with the global stage.
In this rapidly changing environment, the basis for new narratives and strategies has been established. The debates Trump’s governance ignited no doubt will guide policymakers and diplomats for decades, lighting the road to a world struggling with its interconnected fates. Our data is based on up to October 2023, but navigating this character has been a strange trip down the rabbit hole, which we all would do well to throw out a window and wake up from, even the current we are reminded in this way, could be relevant, a reared us calling with the implications!
