There is a scramble among world leaders, diplomats, academics, and analysts to understand the direction in which US President Donald Trump is steering his country and the world at large.

According to Dr. Piet Croukamp, a South African political analyst, a simplistic interpretation of Trump’s second administration suggests that his management style, trade wars against allies and China, closer ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin, and the dismantling of the liberal democratic world order that has prevailed for the past 80 years reflect a thoughtless, egotistical, and unpredictable world leader.

However, Croukamp argues that America’s sense of power and the Trump doctrine are far more complex. He identifies recurring themes in Trump’s policies, including a rejection of the open international system that has existed since World War II, which Trump perceives as disadvantageous to the US. In Trump’s view, this system compels America to finance global security and economic prosperity while other nations reap the benefits.

Another significant driver of Trump’s doctrine, Croukamp told National Security News in an interview, is China’s growing economic power and its increasing competency in technology.

Trump will end relationships not beneficial to the US

Croukamp states that there was an understanding in the West that the US tolerated a degree of liberal democracy.

“Maybe we made a mistake and forgot to consider the American political system as a highly militarised and individualistic one that lacks systemic empathy towards other societies unless it serves their interests,” Croukamp says.

According to him, Donald Trump views the world through the lens of American interests. “If a particular system or relationship is not beneficial to us, we must end it,” he explains.

The Trump doctrine, as described by Croukamp, focuses on renegotiating international agreements and relationships to prioritise American interests above all others.

China’s value chains and growing competitiveness concern Trump

Croukamp highlights that Trump is particularly troubled by China’s growing economic power and its increasing competitiveness in the technology sector. He points out that China’s economy has now surpassed that of the US and is on track to becoming a formidable global force within the next 10 to 15 years.

“Their value and supply chains are now more competitive than those of the US, which is why they produce and export more consumer goods to the American market. This efficiency gives China a significant advantage,” he explains. “When Trump imposed tariffs to limit China’s access to the US economy, the Chinese simply rerouted their exports through Mexico to re-enter the market.”

Croukamp notes that Trump is especially concerned about China’s ability to compete with US technology. He highlights that former President Joe Biden’s restrictions on Chinese access to semiconductors had a significant impact. “When the Chinese president met with Blinken or Biden, the first item on the agenda was semiconductors. They wanted to know why there was a firewall preventing access to this technology,” he says.

Croukamp warns that Trump fears the day China becomes fully capable of designing its own advanced chips. While this may take another 10 to 15 years due to the institutional knowledge concentrated in specific technological hubs, he believes China will eventually succeed.

Militarily, he asserts that the US can no longer afford a war with China. “In terms of purchasing power parity, the Chinese economy is already larger than that of the US. That is the real threat,” he states.

By contrast, he notes, “Russia is neither a technological nor an economic threat; it isn’t even the eleventh-largest economy in the world.”

“As a whole, China represents a real challenge to how America, Americans, and Trump perceive power and the monopoly on global influence they have maintained for the past 80 years,” Croukamp adds.

Trump’s raw power might have some success in Ukraine, but Europe is alienated

Croukamp suggests that Trump’s approach could yield some success in Ukraine. He argues that raw political power can influence the actions of warmongers worldwide. “They sometimes respond to power,” he notes.

However, he warns that Trump is alienating himself from Europe, and he doubts that European nations will ever fully trust him again. Despite this, polls indicate that American voters support his actions.

“Europeans must be prepared to stand on their own,” Croukamp cautions. “America may even side with Europe’s enemies.”

According to Croukamp, the US is unwilling to bear the financial burden of protecting Europe. But, he argues, the issue extends beyond European security. “The Trump administration is signalling that it is no longer willing to pay for the protection of liberal democracies, free societies, or open democracies,” he says.

“We would rather establish arbitrary relationships with authoritarian regimes than continue paying for the maintenance of liberal democracy in Europe,” he adds.

The US administration does not care about Africa

Croukamp asserts that the US has historically neglected Africa, prioritising its own interests instead. He cites a humanitarian crisis in Sudan, exacerbated by the abrupt cessation of USAID, as an example of the dire consequences of US disengagement.

“Suddenly, there was no food or medicine available. The staff had been instructed to go home and not return, leaving those in need without assistance. Mothers with HIV-positive children faced the devastating reality that without medication, their babies would likely contract the virus as well,” he explains.

Croukamp describes the situation as a massive humanitarian catastrophe, yet he observes that Trump, Senator Marco Rubio, and Elon Musk appeared indifferent.

He emphasises that America’s engagement with the world is driven by self-interest: “If we don’t have a particular stake in it, we no longer want to pay for it.”