Trump’s Foreign Policy: The Art of the Deal as Doctrine

American presidents are typically defined by a clear foreign policy doctrine—whether it be Truman’s containment or Monroe’s doctrine—providing a lens through which their leadership is understood.

Over time, a variety of doctrines have been attributed to Donald Trump: Jacksonian populism, realism, nationalism, isolationism, unconventional dovishness, traditional hawkishness, anti-imperialism, and even neo-imperialism. More extreme characterizations have also circulated. Yet, Trump does not fit the mold of an idealist or a Wilsonian internationalist. But does his foreign policy rest on a coherent central idea?

The answer might lie in dealmaking itself. The pursuit of negotiated agreements appears to be the guiding principle behind Trump’s foreign policy, often overriding competing theories about his intentions.

This perspective even challenges some of Trump’s own stated positions. For instance, while “America First” nationalism is a core aspect of his public persona, it does not always dictate his actions. When Middle Eastern allies seek to forge significant partnerships in emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, Trump is willing to engage—even if it means sharing critical technologies internationally. Similarly, when China offers tariff negotiations, he sets aside nationalist ambitions of complete economic separation.

Trump also brands himself as an anti-interventionist, exemplified by a major speech delivered in Saudi Arabia. Yet, his isolationist tendencies can quickly fade when lucrative deals are on the table—as seen in his recent involvement with the India-Pakistan conflict. He also adopts hawkish stances when it serves his goals, ordering military actions against the Houthis, issuing strong threats toward North Korea during his first term, and even threatening NATO allies over territorial ambitions like Greenland. Military force is a tool he employs strategically when adversaries resist negotiation, but he readily shifts to diplomacy once dealmaking prospects improve.

This dynamic is evident in his approach to the Middle East. In his first term, Trump largely followed a conventional Republican hawkish line toward Iran, focusing on protecting Israeli interests and pursuing regime change. However, in his second term, this stance has evolved. The simplest explanation is that Trump perceives Iran as more willing to negotiate, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has become an obstacle to achieving deals.