What Does Trump Want from the World?
WANA (Apr 27) – The world in 2026 is confronted with a fundamental question: is the foreign policy of Donald Trump still operating within the framework of the international order, or has it reached a point where it has itself become a driver of global instability?
What has unfolded in recent months is not merely a series of isolated crises. Rather, it reflects the contours of a distinct doctrine: the simultaneous use of military force, economic pressure, and explicit threats to reshape the global balance of power—even at the cost of undermining rules that have governed the international system for decades.
From “Peace in 24 Hours” to an Open-Ended War
Trump returned to power promising to end wars swiftly. Instead, he now finds himself at the center of one of the most costly conflicts in recent history. The war that began with a U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran in February 2026 has, according to international institutions, become “the largest disruption to global energy supply since the 1970s.”
The dimensions of this crisis extend far beyond the battlefield. Disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz—a chokepoint for roughly 20 percent of the world’s energy supply—have triggered an unprecedented surge in oil prices and sent shockwaves through the global economy.
Amid these developments, the U.S. president’s tone has further heightened concerns. He has openly threatened that, in the absence of an agreement, Iran’s infrastructure would be destroyed—reportedly including its energy facilities.
Going even further, Trump stated in one of his most controversial remarks: “If necessary, the entire country will be destroyed.”
According to analysts, such rhetoric has not only narrowed the space for diplomacy but has also increased the risk of a broader escalation.
A man holds a picture of the late Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on a street in Tehran, Iran, April 12, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
A War That Made the World More Expensive
The consequences of this approach quickly extended beyond the battlefield. Oil prices surged past $100 per barrel, while major economies faced a renewed wave of inflation.
In Europe, economic officials have warned that the impact of the war will persist for months. A senior British official noted that rising energy and food prices could last “at least eight months.”
This marks the point at which foreign policy becomes a domestic issue: the costs of war are directly transferred to consumers, intensifying political pressure on the White House.
Caracas: Crossing the Red Lines of Sovereignty
In Latin America, this doctrine has taken on unprecedented dimensions. Washington’s move to detain and transfer Nicolás Maduro to U.S. soil has been widely described as one of the most controversial actions in modern international relations.
At his first court appearance, Maduro rejected the charges, stating: “I am still the president of Venezuela. I was taken from my home.”
Many governments and legal experts have condemned the move as a clear violation of national sovereignty, raising concerns about the broader implications of such actions. For critics, the case signals that the policy of “maximum pressure” is no longer limited to sanctions, but has expanded into direct intervention.
An Iranian newspaper with a cover photo of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa is seen in Tehran, Iran, January 5, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
Cracks in NATO: “This Is Not Our War”
Perhaps the most significant consequence of these policies has been the weakening of America’s traditional alliances. The war against Iran, carried out without consensus among European allies, has exposed long-standing fractures in transatlantic relations.
A European defense official, responding to Washington’s request for military support, stated bluntly: “This is not our war.”
European leaders, including Friedrich Merz and Keir Starmer, have publicly emphasized the need to preserve NATO cohesion—an emphasis that itself reflects growing concern over the alliance’s gradual erosion.
Europe’s reluctance to support U.S. actions in the Strait of Hormuz, along with discussions about a potential reduction of American troops on the continent, point to declining mutual trust—a trend that could fundamentally reshape Western security dynamics.
Economic Warfare: Pressure Without Winners
Alongside military tensions, Trump’s tariff policies have intensified friction with major economies. Heavy tariffs on China and the European Union have triggered retaliatory measures, raising the risk of a full-scale trade war.
Chinese officials have responded with a clear warning: “Trade wars have no winners.”
This economic confrontation, combined with ongoing security crises, paints a picture of a world increasingly moving toward multipolarity—accompanied by heightened instability.
War, the Strait of Hormuz, and the Shock That Brought the Global Economy to Its Knees
WANA (Apr 25) – When, on February 28, 2026, a U.S.–Israeli military confrontation against Iran began and the Strait of Hormuz was effectively taken out of circulation, it was no longer just a geopolitical flare-up—the world entered a phase in which “energy exists, but it no longer reaches the consumer.” But the issue goes […]
A Doctrine Redefining the Global Order
The reality is that “maximum pressure,” in its current form, is no longer merely a negotiating tactic. It has evolved into a standing strategy—one that blurs the line between war and peace.
What is visible today in U.S. foreign policy is not a series of isolated decisions, but evidence of a deeper shift in Washington’s approach: a doctrine built on three pillars—military power, economic pressure, and explicit threat.
Yet a central question remains: Can this approach successfully redefine the global order, or will it ultimately erode U.S. power and deepen global instability?
Current evidence points more strongly to the latter. In an interconnected world, even the most powerful nations cannot unilaterally rewrite the rules without consequences.
