Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,611
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Created page with "The '''Trump Doctrine'' is shaped by Elbridge Colby's "Strategy Of Denial" according to internal affairs expert Andrew Korybko.<ref>https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-trum..."
The '''Trump Doctrine'' is shaped by Elbridge Colby's "Strategy Of Denial" according to internal affairs expert [[Andrew Korybko]].<ref>https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-trump-doctrine-is-shaped-by-elbridge</ref>
The "Trump Doctrine" is all about the [[US]]' continued [[military]] overmatch vis-à-vis [[China]] together with placing the US in a position where it can complementarily deny China access to the [[energy]] and [[market]]s that it requires to maintain its growth and thus its [[superpower]] trajectory.
[[Trump 2.0]]'s grand [[strategy]] became clear when the US bombed [[ISIS]] in [[Nigeria]] on [[Christmas]] 2025, executed its "special military operation" in [[Venezuela]] kidnapping [[President Maduro]], and threatened more strikes against [[Iran]] on the pretext of supporting anti-government protesters. What these three states have in common is their important roles in the global energy industry and in China's [[Belt & Road Initiative]] (BRI).
Coercing those countries into subordinating themselves to the [[US]] (whether by [[tariff]]s, force, [[subversion]], etc.) would result in [[Trump 2.0]] obtaining influence over their [[energy]] [[export]]s and [[trade]] ties, which could be [[weapon]]ized to pressure [[China]]. What the US wants from China is for it to agree to a lopsided [[trade]] deal that would then be replicated with the [[EU]] and the US; other partners for, as the new [[2025 National Security Strategy]] states, "rebalanc[ing] [[China]]'s [[economy]] towards household consumption".
The implied goal is to coerce China into correcting its overproduction, which is responsible for its unprecedented global exports that displaced [[the West]]'s leading role in world trade and led to enormous influence over the [[Global South]], thus restoring the West's global market share and influence. Such a radical policy change would have major [[economic]] and therefore [[political]] repercussions that could destabilize China, not to mention ending its superpower rise, so it wouldn’t be done voluntarily.
==References==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Donald Trump]]
.
The "Trump Doctrine" is all about the [[US]]' continued [[military]] overmatch vis-à-vis [[China]] together with placing the US in a position where it can complementarily deny China access to the [[energy]] and [[market]]s that it requires to maintain its growth and thus its [[superpower]] trajectory.
[[Trump 2.0]]'s grand [[strategy]] became clear when the US bombed [[ISIS]] in [[Nigeria]] on [[Christmas]] 2025, executed its "special military operation" in [[Venezuela]] kidnapping [[President Maduro]], and threatened more strikes against [[Iran]] on the pretext of supporting anti-government protesters. What these three states have in common is their important roles in the global energy industry and in China's [[Belt & Road Initiative]] (BRI).
Coercing those countries into subordinating themselves to the [[US]] (whether by [[tariff]]s, force, [[subversion]], etc.) would result in [[Trump 2.0]] obtaining influence over their [[energy]] [[export]]s and [[trade]] ties, which could be [[weapon]]ized to pressure [[China]]. What the US wants from China is for it to agree to a lopsided [[trade]] deal that would then be replicated with the [[EU]] and the US; other partners for, as the new [[2025 National Security Strategy]] states, "rebalanc[ing] [[China]]'s [[economy]] towards household consumption".
The implied goal is to coerce China into correcting its overproduction, which is responsible for its unprecedented global exports that displaced [[the West]]'s leading role in world trade and led to enormous influence over the [[Global South]], thus restoring the West's global market share and influence. Such a radical policy change would have major [[economic]] and therefore [[political]] repercussions that could destabilize China, not to mention ending its superpower rise, so it wouldn’t be done voluntarily.
==References==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Donald Trump]]
.