America First: Short-Term Alarms, Long-Term Transformations in Global Order

I don't think buying Greenland, or annexing Canada or for that matter Panama was on our Bingo card this new year.

The "America First" doctrine has undoubtedly disrupted global geopolitics and economics in profound ways. By prioritizing national interests above multilateral commitments, this approach has alarmed many across the globe, especially traditional allies of the United States. Yet, while its immediate effects appear destabilizing, it may yet inadvertently catalyze a rebalancing of global power dynamics, creating a more equitable and decentralized world order. Some thoughts on how "America First" could reshape global geopolitics, economics, and multilateral institutions in the long term.

Remaking of the US as a Benevolent Superpower

For decades, the United States has positioned itself as the cornerstone of a rules-based global order. From championing multilateral institutions like the United Nations (UN) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) to ensuring security in Europe through NATO, the US played a pivotal role in maintaining global stability. However, the "America First" policy has marked a stark departure from this tradition.

Under this doctrine, the US has displayed tendencies toward imperialistic demands. Cases such as renewed interest in controlling strategic resources like the Panama Canal, speculative discussions about acquiring Greenland, and contentious prodding at Canada illustrate a shift from cooperative diplomacy to assertive unilateralism. These actions have not only fractured bonds with traditional allies but also forced allies like Europe to reconsider their reliance on the US.

Europe’s Awakening: From Dependency to Autonomy

Historically, Europe has been substantially dependent on the US for both economic stability and security. Post-World War II, this dependency was institutionalized through frameworks like NATO and the Marshall Plan. However, "America First" has exposed the fragility of these dependencies. The US’s erratic commitment to NATO, coupled with economic policies that prioritize American interests at the expense of allies, has forced Europe to confront its long standing and deep shortcomings in their strategic foresight or lack thereof.

Economic Fragmentation

European Union (EU) countries have long pursued fragmented economic strategies, prioritizing national interests over collective strength. This has been evident in their varied approaches to leveraging the rise of China, securing low-cost energy from Russia, and outsourcing manufacturing to emerging markets. While this has driven short-term economic gains, it has left the EU with little coherence in shaping global strategies.

The Federalism Debate

One of the key challenges for Europe in adapting to the new global order is its lack of centralized power. Unlike the US or China, the EU lacks a unified foreign policy or defense framework. Recent increases in defense spending, with countries like Germany committing to 3-5% of GDP for military budgets, reflect a growing recognition of the need for self-reliance. However, until EU member states cede some sovereignty to the collective, Europe will struggle to act as a cohesive global player. A unified Europe would not only counterbalance US dominance but also provide a stabilizing force in an increasingly multipolar world. This will also be a commencing point for Europe to sustain and grow, the recently fading, prosperity of their citizens.

The Role of Multilateral Organizations

The "America First" doctrine has also raises existential questions about the relevance and validity of multilateral organizations. Institutions like the UN, World Health Organization (WHO), WTO, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Bank (WB)- all which have traditionally relied heavily on US leadership and funding. Trump-era skepticism toward these bodies—epitomized by the US withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and critiques of NATO—highlights their vulnerability. Less multilateralism, more multi-polar seems to be the emerging landscape, should America First prevail. As the US retreats from its leadership role, other nations and blocs will step in to fill the void. China’s Belt and Road Initiative which is now receding due to funding challenges could see a resurgence and its growing influence could shift the global power dynamics. Similarly, regional alliances such as BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), currently nothing more than a geopolitical posturing device, could start asserting themselves as alternatives a more independent "Global South" frameworks. The question that will determine the end outcome: Can these countries commit, conduct, orchestrate such a decentralized model of governance, or will thwart world live under substantial level of chaos for the foreseeable future?

Decentralized Global Economy: Multipolarity as a Stabilizer

One of the most profound long-term impacts of "America First" is the acceleration of a multipolar global economy. The US’s retreat from multilateral trade agreements and its focus on bilateral deals have created opportunities for other powers to assert their influence.

India and China’s Role

India and China, as the world’s two most populous nations and fastest-growing economies, are poised to play critical roles in this new order. India’s emphasis on self-reliance (“Atmanirbhar Bharat”) and China’s focus on technological and economic dominance suggest a gradual decoupling from US-led systems. Both countries are investing heavily in regional trade blocs such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), signaling a shift toward localized economic ecosystems.

Regional Trade Blocs

The rise of regional trade blocs and partnerships, such as the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), reflects a broader trend toward decentralization. These frameworks distribute economic power more equitably, reducing reliance on a single global hegemon.

The Long-Term Impact on US Influence

In the short term, "America First" seeks to maximize US economic and political gains. However, this approach may have unintended consequences for its long-term influence.

Economic Isolation

By prioritizing protectionist policies, the US risks alienating trading partners and undermining its role in global supply chains. For instance, tariffs on Chinese goods have not only strained US-China relations but also disrupted global markets. As other nations form new alliances, the US’s relative economic power could decline.

Diplomatic Challenges

The erosion of trust among allies makes it increasingly difficult for the US to rally support for its initiatives. Successive administrations may find it challenging to rebuild these relationships, especially if allies have adapted to a more self-reliant posture.

A New Global Equilibrium

While "America First" signals a decline in US hegemony, it also paves the way for a more balanced world order. A decentralized, multipolar landscape, where multiple powers share responsibilities and influence, could lead to greater stability and sustainability. This would mark the end of Pax Americana and the beginning of a new era characterized by shared governance.

Conclusion

The "America First" doctrine is reshaping the global order in profound ways. By retreating from its role as a benevolent superpower, the US is forcing allies and adversaries alike to adapt to a more decentralized and multipolar world. Europe’s journey toward autonomy, the evolving role of multilateral organizations, and the rise of regional powers like India and China all point to a future where no single nation dominates the global stage.

While the immediate impacts of this shift are disruptive, the long-term outcomes could be transformative. A world characterized by decentralized power, equitable economic distribution, and shared governance holds the promise of greater stability and prosperity. However, navigating this transition will require visionary leadership and a commitment to cooperation among nations. As the world adjusts to this new reality, the question remains: Can we embrace multipolarity as an opportunity for collective progress, or will the growing pains of this transition lead to further fragmentation and conflict?